1076 posts • joined 22 May 2007
I think the better way would be to find out what it'd natural predator is, and introduce that to the areas.
Then, when they go out of control, find THEIR natural predator and introduce them.
And then... OK, maybe not such a good plan, a la "She swallowed the spider to catch the fly".
"But they'll be dead soon anyway. Fucking kangaroos."
Why, do kangaroos carry deadly STDs?
Or is it just that kangaroo love is so common in Aus?
That's the point
If one country sees another fire a nuke, they won't hang around to see where it's target is, they'll immediately assume the worst.
"I and most people are well aware of the lack of sense of humor homeland security / immigration / customs have while entering (or leaving) the USA. the golden rule is if your planing on going in holiday to the USA or any other country for that matter, make sure you are well aware of what is likely to piss the government or the populous off and avoid it... unless your intention is to piss them off."
Not just the USA. A mate at Uni went to Aus with a group in his year out. One of the lads in the group, when asked if he had a criminal record, reponded with "I didn't know you still needed one to get in".
Always going to be a mistake, and rather an uncomfortable one (latex gloves went on pretty quickly).
Only 2 thoughts here.
1, these "kids" were a little misguided (i.e. completely stupid) to make these comments in a public forum. Do they not remember the guy who tweeted about blowing up the airport?
2, the security services of all countries need to take a chill pill. The comments were obviously a bad taste joke, maybe double checking them and questioning them quickly to make sure is OK, but deporting them?
To be fair, I think this just reflects what I have believed for a while: average intelligence of the world's human population is going down hill.
No longer happenning on my Giffgaff connection.
"penalties of up to €1 million or up to 2% of the global annual turnover of a company"
Is this whichever is lower or whichever is higher?
I would assume the first, but it is not made clear in the article (and I don't have time to look it up myself).
In addition, I agree with the comment about "a right to be heard". Credit referrence agencies can be terrible, as can the people processing that data (when you apply for a loan, it is the bank etc. who decide whether to approve you, not the agency who suppilies the data). If you have withheld payment for a legitimate reason, you can end up with a mark on your credit history, and there's nothing you can really do to get it removed (quickly) unless the company agrees, and banks are less than sympathetic to such issues.
Just tried this
from my Giffgaff connection and makes no difference.
If they can't meet, either the industry dies or things carry one as they are.
At the end of the day, they make enough money as things stand (forget this bull about them loosing so much, the films still make millions in profit) and the industry CAN continue with the status quo. This is likely why they are pushing for legislation like this: If it is true that many wouldn't go and buy their products even if they weren't available illegitimately, which I think they accept (if not publicly) then they loose nothing and protect their out dated business model.
Sorry small correction:
"They are able to download a torrent of a file, for example"
should have been
"They are able to download a torrent of a FILM, for example"
Nice article, thanks
Totally agree that there needs to be discussion, debate and compromise to solve this issue. The problem is neither side wish to do so/
The way I see it, the media industries shot themselves in the foot a long time ago and have been struggling to stop the hemorrhage since. They failed to keep up with technology, so people stepped into the gap and provided the services people wanted: the only problem was, without the media industries backing, it was piracy, and the media industry made no money from it.
There is now a generation where a large proportion have become used to getting any media they want almost instantly, and available to watch on any device they wish. The fact it is free is incidental. They are able to download a torrent of a file, for example, on the day of release (and sometimes earlier) and, a short while later, watch it. They can then play it on their phone, their PC, their TV... any device they want, for as long as they want, in as good quality as they would get if they had gone to the shop and bought the DVD/BluRay. There are no restrictions on operating systems or number of devices they can play it on. There are no trailers or adverts about "copyright theft". In short it is convenient and simple.
Having "forced" a big chunk of this generation into such distribution methods, the industry needs to come up with something which is at least as good in order to convert them, as they will not pay for a service of a lower standard than they are used to receiving for free. They also need to price it sensibly, so they are encouraged to use it. And they need to make ALL content available, as with only a limitted amount, why should they switch?
This is a better method than enforcement (at the moment). There will still be some die-hard "freetards" (hate the term, but it's the best term available) who will not switch, but with a reasonable, legal alternative most will. At this point, it will be easier (and less unpopular) to target enforcement action at those who have not switched (if there are enough of them to be worth it by then).
To sum it all up, the media industry (IMHO) need to "win the hearts and minds" of the public (mainly the tech public) with a GOOD QUALITY, GOOD VALUE service before they wage war on the illegitimate sources of media. Instead, they choose to offer services of a lower standard than those availble elsewhere and shut down the places offering what their customers want.
Then they are surprised when their customers fight back.
Instead of fighting the tech, they should be engaging them to find out what they want, and providing it.
Note: I am not saying the "pirates" are in the right, just that the media industry are, IMO, doing things in the wrong way. So are the tech industry.
"It will be interesting to see how this works out though. F1 is such a commercially-dependent sport and I wonder how the reduced viewing figures will impact the teams' ability to attract sponsorship."
I wouldn't be surprised to see it end up the same way Premiership football has: so dependant on TV fees that it becomes their bitch.
"It'll be a streaming site for me, or friends/pubs with Sky."
I reckon you'll be lucky to find a pub showing the F1.
F1 races are on Sundays, normally in the afternoon. Guess which more popular sport is also shown on Sunday afternoons on Sky?
There was one pub I went to which showed F1, a biker bar which has sadly shut down, but that was because it was FTA (they didn't have Sky).
Though I big F1 fan, I had already told the missus-to-be that I would not be paying extra for F1: I already hate paying for Sky, even on the basic (HD) package, and will not pay extra. She blames me for getting her into F1.
Luckily, I have been reliably informed that the F1 channel will be free if you have either Sports or HD packages, so I should get it for no extra.
If not, I can get my motorsport fix elsewhere: MotoGP anyone?
"you're assuming that the plants we have can cope with the amount of polution humanity is creating"
I know CO2 is not the only pollutant we are creating, but it is the most talked about, and plants like higher CO2 concentrations (in general).
Therefore by putting out CO2 we are probably helping the plants which will, eventually, remove it from the atmosphere and restore balance.
This doesn't stop your point about "hacking away at the plants" being true.
Ive wondered before why a "smartphone" needs to contain all the gubbins it does. My own idea was a "dumb" phone which does phone calls and text messages only, in a tiny package, then a "smart" termial, which can do all the cool stuff and uses the dumb phone for connectivity. This goes much further... I like it, I want it :)
@Aaron EmHe was saying other AR devices require you holding your device out at arms-length in a gesture similar to those used by German Nazi's. He didn't even come close to calling you a Nazi. I, however, come very close to calling you a moron!
I'm pretty sure that, even in our company (a semiconductor manufacturer), it's a serious disciplinary offence. For a cop... Blimey, I wouldn't be surprised if he could be prosecuted for it!
Excuze ma spelin an grama
I always mix them up...
El Reg is going to loose revenue.
I have always disabled ABP etc on the Register to support them.
These ads have become so disruptive I'm not going to bother any more. ABP back on.
Take note: Readers are often more than happy to have ads, not so happy when they make a chunk of the article slide off their screen a few seconds into reading!
Dell Streak 5-incher seems just about pocketable
OK, I put my hands up, I was wrong. I had never heard of Jury Nullification. In fact, when I was on a jury, the court's directions seemed to go completely against that, even if only by implication, which is where my viewpoint comes from.
It seems to me that this is not very well known and would probably have more impact if jurors knew of it. As far as I was concerned, I was there to evaluate the evidence under the law (although it would have made no difference in that case).
Thanks for the correction and education :)
"What the courts say is one thing, but *juries* have awarded copyright holders enormous sums for damages. Is there any reason to think that those juries were more representative of the American public than the sample in this survey?"
AFAIK the damages are not assigned by a jury, but by the judge. The jury only decides guilty/not guilty of each charge.
Even if it is the jury who award the damages, they will be directed in what they are allowed to do by the judge. Many may feel the damages are disproportionate, but a jury is not allowed to flout the law: If they find the defendant guilty of x, they must award damages of y. I have been on a jury, and their remit is severely limitted.
Similarly if it is a judge who makes the descision, the both he and the jury are constrained by the law. If the case is proven that someone is guilty, the jury must find them guilty. They cannot use their sympathies to decide that, althopugh they committed a crime, they should be let off. The judge must then use this verdict to determine the punishment within the constraints of the law. There may be a small amount of wiggle room allowed in the legal framework, but things must remain within that framework.
"The only thing I find confusing is the scoring, which even the show's host doesn't seem to understand."
The scores don't matter. Simples.
"instead of just thinking about STEM, we should add the Arts so it becomes STEAM."
Sounds like a load of hot air to me
Obvious answer (in my oppinion)
"Well, chaps, here's an idea. Why not choose a representative sample of 2,000 broadband users, grant them immunity for a couple of months, and do a silent double-blind test? Perhaps with some of the sample you could experiment with new ideas. The ISP knows exactly what's going on, so speculating on speculation should become superfluous."
This research would have to be conducted by (or with the express consent of) the industry (music/film/software producers working together) to allow them to offer immunity. However, these are the exact same people who do not want this research conducted: they want to be able to maintain their archaic business models, and this research would likely (IMHO) force them into doing something new.
"The Yard added that a single piece of copper cable nicked from an underground telephone network could knock out the landlines to more than 200 homes and businesses for up to three days at a time."
Doesn't sound like a well designed infrastructure to me... ah, wait, it's BT, I get it.
"Law based on actually studying a case properly rather than give in blindly to lobby groups!"
I know, it's incredible!
Way to miss the target, Sean Baggaley 1
AFAIK, Amazon was happily selling eBooks (along with several others) as they do real books: i.e. buy the book from the publisher, sell it, with a negotiated wholesale price paid to the publisher, and then Amazon free to set their price (subject to competition).
That's where Apple came along to demand a chunk of the pie. They didn't want anyone selling for less than them, so they and the publishers forced a different model. In effect, it means the publisher is selling the book to the consumer, and gives a cut to the retailer. It amounts to price fixing, and is the reason many Kindle books now say "This price was set by the publisher"
Note: the above is what I understand from the articles I have read. There may be inaccuracies, but I believe the overall story is correct.
"It is as much a legal requirement to have a TV licence if you own and operate a TV in the UK as it is to tax a car if you keep it on the road."
It is not a requirement to have a license if you own and operate a TV in the UK. It is a requirement to have a TV license if you receive broadcast TV content. It is perfectly legal to own equipment capable of receiving TV broadcasts without a TV license IF you don't recieve them (e.g. have no aerial connected, detune the TV etc.), no matter what they try to tell you. The license ppl can get quite threatenning. I have a friend who did this. They needed to save money, so cancelled the TVL, detuned the TVs, diconnected the aerials, and stopped watching TV (watched DVDs etc when they wanted to). The TVL sent someone round, she invited them in and showed them that she could not get broadcast TV in the house. Initially they claimed "you could just plug back up and retune the equipment", but this doesn't hold water. They went away with tails between legs, and a year or so later, when my friend had the money to do so, the license started being paid again.
...that would rule out all heterosexual intercourse.
All women are crazy!
Joking of course... or am I?
"No one is going to pay an iPad price for anything other than an iPad."
I will add one word... "Yet".
When Android phone's first appeared, nobody was going to pay iPhone prices for them, because they could get an iPhone for that. Therefore lower priced Android phones appeared, allowing Android to make a big push into the market.
Now many are prepared to pay MORE for an Android phone than and iPhone.
This is what needs to happen with tablets. Devices like the Fire need releasing to allow the Android Tablet to make a big push into the market. Once this happens, people will be more likely to look at higher-priced models.
"It's interesting to note the difference between CERN's handling of some odd results, and CRU and, well, any data at all."
I must agree.
CERN's handling of it's "faster than light" findings has been an example to all scientists. Publishing all the data involved, including the method used to collect and analyse that data, allows the whole scientific community to analyse it and find any possible errors. This is a very important step in something which affects a fundamental law of physics...
...or something which may have massive impact upon the entire human population, as climate scientists claim will happen with climate change.
I am not saying one way or the other whether man-made climate change is correct. All I am saying is that when something is as important as this, CERN's method is the correct one, not CRU's.
"In an attempt to avoid inaccuracy, I suggest simply inventing new, short words instead."
We could call it "Newspeak".
This is a true comment, however your T&Cs will state that the account holder is responsible for use of the account. Now, while this shouldn't stand up in court for other actions, it does mean that the ISP can justifiably disconnect you for breaching your T&Cs.
Also, I believe that the action would be a civil prosecution, which does not carry the same burden of proof as criminal proceedings. Merely presenting that it is your account would, I think, be enough to win their case if you presented no evidence in defence (IANAL).
It is not discrimination to ask an obese person to pay extra if they are going to require 2 seats, it is geometry: You do not fit in 1 seat. If you take up the space of 2 passengers, expect to pay more.
My mum is tiny, yet even she was squashed when she was forced to sit next to one overweight american who hadn't bought an extra seat (and she was only sat their because my dad couldnt fit at all next to this inconsiderate b***h!)
I, too, have found the network to perform identically to O2.
And forum-wise, I find the majority of the answers to be informative. Of course some are complete tosh, as with any forum, but it works for me and costs me half as much as I was paying on an O2 simplicity plan.
"But none of that helps run the actual network, which still needs engineers to keep it operational, and while the approaching-two-day outage may only be affecting a small number of people, it is still unacceptable for any mobile network – even one run by its customers."
And O2 has never had such problems before? I seem to remember a recent much larger scale mobile data problem from them.
I can't remember about any others, but the truth is all network operators have occasional glitches. Nobody is perfect.
Plenty of ideas here, but my personal favorite (for it's simplicity) is using condensation to lower the pressure. I am not sure how low you could get with this setup, but I would suggest the following:
* Fill the chamber with steam. This is probably easiest to accomplish by pouring in a small amount of boiling water.
* With lid still in place, cool with cold water to condense the steam.
* Remove the cold water and add the dry ice. This should remove any remaining water vapour and freeze the water at the bottom, so the humidity should not be too different.
To increase the effectiveness, you could add a small vac pump (e.g. vaccuum cleaner or from a diesel) to reduce the pressure before chilling, but this will also remove some steam... It'd take some experimentation to ensure it would get the pressure low enough. You may need to try a different refrigerant, too, but if it works it's definitely the simplest option...
One other option I can see... Take the chamber, with a one-way valve installed (in place of the vac pump) to a hypobaric chamber. They take the pressure down, then when you take it out it's all set at the required pressure, ready to chill and fire.
I beleive you are highlighting the main misconception of society in your comment here.
Engineers ARE BOTH technical AND creative people.
Solving a complex engineering problem requires both technical ability and a creative mind. The best engineers often solve the new problems by coming up with new techniques, which obviously involves a creative element. Even applying an existing technique to a new situation involves imagination and creativity.
The problem is that (in this country at least) engineers are considered the doers. I remember a poll in the UK asking people to name the most famous engineer they knew. The most popular answer: Kevin Webster, a mechanic from Coronation Street. It does not help that cleaners have job titles like "Sanitation Engineer", but in this country the word Engineer is misunderstood by the vast majority of the population.
Contrast this to, for example, Germany. Over there, engineers are looked upon very highly, in the same way as doctors. I beleive (although I may be wrong) that there are rules about who may be called an engineer.
The problem is not that Devs/Coders/Software engineers are not recognised in their creative capacity, but that technical creatives in general are not recognised by the majority of the population. This is why we are regulated to "doers", and the crayon brigade get the aclaim.
Yes, but what if their science is flawed? What if they cut up wood to make tables when they have perfectly good tummies to eat off?
The headline would be better without "US nuclear aircraft carrier"
... have Apple sue you for using their trademark on the device. D'Oh! Don't think you thought that one through.
We're not stoning anyone...
... Even if they do say "Jehovah"!
Doesn't add up...
"Pogoplug Cloud is a Dropbox-style service: you get 5GB of online storage space for free, but you can expand that to 50GB or 100GB for $10 (£6) and $20 (£13) a month, respectively. That's what Dropbox charges, and is rather better value than Apple is offering with iCloud: £70 a year for 55GB."
50GB for £6 per mo = £1.44 per GB per year
55GB for £70 per yr = £1.27 per GB per year
So Apple's offering is actually better value (who'da thunk it?) if your figures are correct.
"It will be interesting to see if Oracle can get Solaris 11 on a wide selection of x86-based servers, too."
Well, I know they need to validate it etc, but I have been running Solaris 11 Express on a converted desktop for a while now as a test bed, with no issues. I have to say I love it.
"If they open up a new opensolaris"
I have heard they will be releasing source after they release 11 in full, so it should give a boost to the Solaris-based systems (Nexenta etc.) and other ZFS implementations.
I was about to reply telling you that you are wrong, but I just checked...
Blimey! 1TB HDDs could be had for sub-£50 not long ago, 2TB for £70ish, what the hell's going on?!?!
Censorship is Doubleplusungood.
Let us censor.
(doublethink at it's best, here)
Depends which average... I suspect more than half are more stupid than the mean stupidity level.
Part of the problem, here...
is how long it takes to get to court.
Let us imagine a scenario where this case gets to court in mid-2012, and Samsung win. So what now? The products are worthless, having been superceeded by the next generation.
If they are going to have these patent battles for high tech devices which will be outdated in 6 months (max), get 'em into a court room pronto and decide, or don't allow an injunction till the case is done.