This raises the philosophical question...
... If a US Special Ops stealthy whirlybird crashes in the forest, and there's nobody left alive to hear it, does it make sound?
1376 posts • joined 11 Jun 2007
... If a US Special Ops stealthy whirlybird crashes in the forest, and there's nobody left alive to hear it, does it make sound?
Lets a get a few things straight:
Stalin - trained as an orthodox priest before leaving to join the revolution.
Manson - started his own "church". Kinda like this moron.
Hitler - happily bought off the church with a large amount of money in the form of the kirchesteuben (Church tax). And singled out other religions (judaism in particular, but others as well) as being for the gas chamber.
Just because they didnt do their death and destruction in the name of a religion, doesnt mean they didnt follow a religion.
Why you thought your comment was a relevant reply to AC's comment, which was stating that fundamentalists of all religions cause problems for the rest of us, i will never know!
Sorry Jason, but your arguments dont stand.
1) Deaf people realise they have lost one sense so they make up for it by being extraordinarily attentive to the other ones. For one, they are very unlikely to cross a major intersection without waiting for the little green man and they will use their eyes to make sure the path is clear before ever putting one foot on to the road.
2) No-one is saying you will be punished for "f*cking up" as you so fabulously put it. You will get a A$100 fine if you walk out on to the road without looking, against the red man, and whilst wearing headphones/earplugs. This is already a law (whether your wearing headphones/earplugs or not). This sounds to me like the police are just putting everyone on notice that they are going to start enforcing this law. And the prosecutions for causing an accident, seem reasonable to me. Whether your wearing headphones or not, if you cause an accident by being stupid or inattentive then you deserve to feel the brunt of the law.
3) I'm just going to ignore your third paragprah as useless hyperbole.
4) Pedestrians still get the right of way in most cases but it is a give and take situation. When you are driving and you approach a set of traffic lights which are green you have a reasonable expectation that this means people are not going to step out in front of you. Just as for a pedestrian, when the little green man is lit up you have an expectation that a car is not going to run a red light and knock you down whilst your crossing. Its all about consideration. And when a car driver does hit a person who has stepped directly into the path of their car with no chance to brake in time, its more then one life thats ruined. Not only does it affect the family of the victim, but the driver of the car is usually shattered as well - no-one likes to be responsible for the death or incapacitation of someone else...
So you can call this an attack on people's liberty and their right to make mistakes, but I cannot see it that way. If this campagin stops one person from being bulldozed to death because they werent paying attention, then thats a dozen people connected to that person who avoid having their lives torn apart as well, and for me thats a damn good thing...
Sorry to blow your bubble LPF but i video call regularly over skype. As do a number of my friends. True we're all expats living a long way from home, and for that reason, video calls are a great way to stay in touch with family and friends half the world away. And true ive never had a video call with someone in the same country and certainly never over a mobile phone (at the prices they charge! Hell No!). But i do video call internationally all the time.
So im really not sure why your on your hobby hourse about this. A front facing camera doesnt take up much space on the device, it doesnt add more then a few grams in weight and nor does it blow out the cost of the device. So whats your point? Its a nice feature - even if you dont use it! Kinda like the window washer on your car - Ive never used mine (because i clean the windows when im at a service station) but i realise that other people do use it, i can see maybe one day it might come in handy (on a particularly dusty road, perhaps?). So im happy its there, it doesnt cost me anything, doesnt slow my car down. Why should i demand its removal?
Oh and why is everyone bringing them out? Well the iPad has sold a McTruckload, so why shouldnt other companies attempt to cash in? Just because you dont see the point in the iPad, doesnt mean others dont...
So if i understand the press release correctly, an airport servicing Greater Manchester (population ~2,250,000) is called a "Regional airport" now.
Interesting context for the use of the word regional, but i guess anything for a good headline, eh?
"unless there’s some late-breaking scandal involving salacious text messages and nude starlets. In that case, we’ll cover the universe thing a few days later."
Finally, some honesty in reporting!
You werent partaking of a few "fumes" before you went to bed last night were you by any chance?
And according to the pic, it also allows you to fly! Amazing!
I've never been asked for ID here in Germany except when trying to get on a plane or when checking into a hotel, which is standard procedure even in the UK.
Whilst i think technically, I'm supposed to carry ID everywhere over here, in over a year I've never been asked by anyone for it and neither has anyone i know. The only time I've heard of someone being asked for their ID was when they were being questioned by the police about a traffic incident, and thats the same case as it would be in the UK.
So please stop spouting anti-Schengan rubbish, which is blatantly false...
... but in a 17" machine i still do not understand why you wouldnt have at least a 1080p resolution. Especially with a machine with a Bluray player. It really does not make since to me!
HP have done this with there new DV7 line as well. The only 1080p compliant model at 17" will be the Envy 17 (in the UK at least).
If your going to include a Bluray player it should be a minium requirement to have a screen which can show the film at full resolution. Sorry Samsung until you bring out a 1080p screen - your off my selection list!
Ive always found opinion polls to be amazing. Amazing in the fact that politicians take these as being fact and representative of the whole population, rather then the reality that they reflect only the opinions of those people who are a) too stupid not to hang up after the first five seconds of a telemarketers call; b) have so much time on their hand that they dont mind answering a telemarketers call (im guessing this is the very old and the very lonely); and c) those who are taking the piss and giving the stupidest answers imaginable.
That so many of our political decisions are based on the repsonses of these 3 groups of people really makes my head spin at times...
The Whitehats need to publically name and shame all of the hosts which refuse to co-operate when shown the data and participate in the takedown.
Additionally, all of the upstream providers of these hosts should be informed and shown the data, as they are really the only ones with leverage over the lower tiers. Removable of your ability to provide internet to your customers is a pretty good lever to get an ISP into line.
It would also then be pertinent to handover the data to local police authorities. In western countries im sure you could get a response against these ISP's for hosting spam/malware/virus servers/etc. In the rest of the world probably not so much action will be taken, but at least we can hope that in the more corrupt countries the local poli's will start demanding a cut for turning their back and so make it slightly less profitable to host these bastards...
Just an idea...
Because its made with all of those solid state drives, should it perhaps be known as Flash Gordon?
Yes i know, i'll get my coat...
In the UK we have a thing called Democracy. Thats how we fight back.
See the perfect example is that the previous government started to go all fascist police state on us. We had an election, we voted for the other guys who were not fascist police state people. They got into power, they are now removing the fascist police state stuff implemented by the past government.
No need for guns, no need for the army to get involved. Its an interesting concept, that people can vote for a different type of government i know, but you guys should really give it a go sometime...
"If you dont think drugs have done some good in this world, do me a favour - go home tonight and take out all your albums and burn 'em. Because you know all those artists that have made all that great music that has enhanced your life throughout the years? Rrrrrrrrrrrreal high on drugs!"
I'll still take a drugged up egomaniac to supply my music hits over the balless, soulless corporate bitches the record companies are spewing out now...
... but i felt it needed repeating. How do they know these people were on holiday and not on business trips? If they just count someone as loggin on inflight or in a different town as being on holiday thats just plain stupid.
I fly to Toulouse once a month for work and yes, i login to my company portal on the way and once there. Its called a business trip. When im on holiday, noone in the office will hear from me until the day i walk back in the door.
The only people ive ever met who actually check there work stuff whilst on a holiday are top level managers (because they dont trust their plebs not to cock up/organise a coup whilst they're gone) and people who are actually on Jolly's and not on "official" holidays.
Questionable research for sure...
It takes 18 months to perform this sort of research???
Funny but I didnt realise that the Royal Society was a government funded quango!!! I cant imagine any othe reason why it would take so long...
What they mean by this is that the standard in passports worldwide is for your pic to be on the second page. The UK was one of the few nations which doesnt do this (your details being at the back of the passport!), meaning when you go somewhere outside the UK they first fumble for the second page and then have to thumb through to try and find your pic.
So in reality, time saved is bugger all but the UK is now in line with the rest of the world which is just always that little bit easier for all concerned...
I didnt say that Wikileaks should not be releasing sensitive documents. I said RELEVANT documents.
Of the 150,000+ reports leaked, the vast majority said nothing more then - "On Patrol in X, Did Y, went back to base. End of Mission.". I mean seriously, how is that in the public interest?
The release of the video that showed the chopper gunning down civilians - THAT was in the public interest. Some seargent speculating that he thinks that Pakistan Inteligence Services may be behind the funding of the Taliban or that this source said that, is not really in the public interest.
Going on the sort of campaign that Wikileaks seems to be on at the moment against the US Government, just means that the really important whistleblowing documents get buried in amongst the crap and so never see the light of day that they deserve.
Thats my problem with Wikileaks at the moment. Get it back to how it was 6 months ago when the documents it released where relevant and actually newsworthy, i do not need to know what some general in afghanistan had for breakfast...
... but am i the only one that is seeing Wikileaks slide from being a relevant whistleblower site where people working in governments or companies could upload documents that they felt were in the publics interest to know, to a publicity seeking whore site which basically will release any document it comes across which is considered classified/secret or just not really worth releasing to the public, without actually seeing if it is something worth the public knowing about?
I'm sure there are still relevant documents being uploaded to wikileaks but you dont hear about them these days because there buried in so much sh*te...
When comparing figures from ye olde days and modern times is that in the 19th century and the first half of the 20th, policing was still very much in its infancy. Murder and assault was incredibly common in the poorer areas (think East End) but since only poor people lived there, there were very few police and so crimes went unreported more often then not.
The high figures you see today are because EVERY death is investigated. Additionally, with modern technology and invetigative techniques, what would most certainly have been brushed off as a heart attack or a fall can in these times be easily identifed as murder.
So whilst 1901 may look like the streets were all safe and Britian was a utopia the fact is many deaths went unreported or uninvestigated and i would suspect a large number were ignored for lack of evidence. I have no doubt that to be charged with murder in 1901, probably required you to be either caught at the scene or positively identifed by someone of high standing as being there. Anything else was guess work...
So your comparing Apples and Oranges, when you compare official figures for different eras of policing...
And the death penalty existed before Manson and his brood went on their murder spree - didnt seem to deter them much did it? Nor does it seem to deter the thousands of murders that are committed each year in the US now, does it?
And if Manson was executed today, would that bring back his victims? Nope.
So lets see - deterrent element - doesnt appear to be working; Brings back the vicitims - afraid not.
If the only reason you have for supporting the death penalty is that keeping people in prison costs you and other taxpayers money - well thats a pretty f&%ked up world view if you ask me.
Is that the ASP doesnt appear to have done deals for preferences like many other parties and this seems to have cost them in the final standing.
They polled very well in the primaries but when the lowest voted for candidates started to drop out, the votes tended to be redistributed almost solely to the major parties. I credit this to too many people voting above the line and not putting the effort in to vote below the line (For the senate in Australia you have the choice of voting 1 for a party and then your preferences are handled as the party decides - voting above the line; or of numbering all of the candidates (84 in NSW) in order to precisely decide your preferences for yourself - voting below the line. Unfortunately too many Australians are lazy and didnt put the effort into decide there own preferences).
Next time they should think about getting some preference deals going with some of the other parties such as the shooters party and the democrats. This will help them get in next time.
But still theyve got my votes!
1) Australia doesnt have nukes. Never has, never will. You may be thinking of Pine Gap which is one of the worldwide US military bases which has some control over the US nuclear wepaons profile. However, this is a US base and not an Australian base. And just to make it perefctly clear - there are ZERO nukes on Aus soil.
2) The Lockerbie bomber was Libyan not Syrian. Pretty big difference there... Should i draw you a map?
Although they did rank as the 4th or 5th party in every single state except Tasmania (pulling on average 2-3% of the primary vote). Behind the Lib/Nats, ALP and Greens.
So for a first time run thats actually not too bad... Hopefully in another 3.5 years we will see a better showing! =)
But then why do you need VTOL as opposed to standard UAV's if your going to airdrop the packages? And if you need zero forward momentum whilst doing it, then how does this present a better solution then a helicopter?
I'm all for this thing from a technical point of view and ive done the cost/benefit analysis of tiltrotors versus both fixed wing and standard rotorcraft before (i'm a big fan of tiltrotors i must admit). But i do not see this as being hugely useful in the proposed role of covert parcel delivery. But maybe my idea of what constitutes a covert parcel is different to DARPA's!
... but if a 10 foot wingspan bat comes flying into my window (assuming i have a window that large) i think im going to notice it leaving something behind. Not even to mention the noise. So what sort of covert payload can something this big (and loud) leave behind? I think people would notice it in a city. And if your the kind of person who lives in a cave and is a subject of interest to the US warmachine, you would probably have a guard or two watching the cave entrance so i would imagine they would see this coming too.
So not really sure what sort of a covert payload a 10 foot wide delivery vehicle could drop off in any location... ideas?
Best song to wake up to ever... And the film clip is the footage from the Excelsior stratospheric balloons jumps (longest freefall in history).
Other suggestion - See you later, alligator... ;)
... and my proposal was that once they identify that a sim was stolen, and had been racking up these charges on a premium rate number then to ban that number across the entire network. It would mean that as soon as that sim was identified as stolen, no other sim would be able to call that particular premium number and dial up those charges.
If they steal a new sim it means they need to dial a different premium rate number. And if its really that easy to create premium rate numbers then that points to a whole different raft of problems with the telecommunications industry, dont you think?
So im not really seeing your point...
So O2 would be screwed for the first month thats true, but this went on for months. It cannot be that easy to start up premium rate numbers that the crims can have huge numbers of these to switch between!
Or i suppose an easy way to get around this would be for O2 and other operators not to pay the premium rate numbers for 30-60 days after the call. Lets face it, lots of businesses have 30-60 day invoice periods already. It would take out the risk for both O2 and the rest of us who pay the price in the end through higher phone call rates. And if O2 cant pick out a fraudulent premium rate number within 30 days then frankly they deserve to get fleeced!
... If O2 were losing money because these creeps were calling specific premium phone numbers, why didnt they just block access to calling these numbers?
In theory it would seem to be a simple operation - a phone is identified as stolen and the phonecalls fraudulent. Identify numbers called, block all future calls to any premium rate number called by said stolen phone across the entire O2 network. Problem solved.
Ok you may lose money until the phone is identifed as stolen but that shouldnt take more then a few weeks at the absolute most.
What am i missing here?
Would it be possible to NOT link the value of the salary sacrifice to the value of the vouchers supplied and state that the value of the service provided is far below the cost of the purchasing of the vouchers? Whilst some VAT would need to be paid for the "service" of providing the voucher, this would be a lower value compared to the VAT reclaimed in the purchase of the vouchers, and so mean that the cost to the company would not necessarily be as high.
I dont normally advocate creative accounting (especially by companies) but this seems like a ridiculous move by HMRC that will only hurt the workers of these companies...
... but it almost makes me want to become an astronomer/astrophysicist just so i can declare myself to be one of the astrocognoscenti...
MinionZero, im not sure if your agreeing with me or not.
I suspect we're looking at the history of seatbelts from a slightly different point of view. The use of seatbelts was brought in gradually, and when it became clear that they were an excellent way to save lives it became law that they be installed on all new cars. However, it was not originally required to retrofit them into old cars, because it was identifed that doing so would lead to backyard jobs that could actually make things more dangerous (fix the seatbelt to the wrong spot and you could, for example, reduce the strength of the bodywork so that in an accident the car buckled worse causing more damage). It was only about 15 years after the original law was brought in that the requirement to retrofit was introduced. And by that stage, there werent that many cars left to be retrofitted and the installation of seatbelts was a well known task, so retrofitting could be done safely and without risk.
That would be the way i see the introduction on parachutes being brought in as well.
I suppose for me the current situation more closely resembles the introduction of airbags into vehicles. Its not a legal requirement to have an airbag in your car nor the types of airbags to be used (driver, passnger, side, etc). However, you would be hard pressed to find a new car being sold without airbags, and if one did exist it would have to have some other amazing selling points to have people buy it without the added safety feature of an airbag. Additionally, i think you would be very hard pressed to find anyone who would try and retrofit an airbag to an old car, the cost would be high and you would have no guarantee that it would actually work as designed because the car was never designed to have the airbag in the first place.
So im all for parachute technology being brought in for new aircraft but i think its an incredibly risky proposition to have old aircraft retrofitted...
MinionZero - whilst i have no idea whether the use of aircraft parachutes is legal or not in the UK, you have to keep in mind the balanced view which the CAA have to take on this issue.
First, a large percentage of light aircraft crashes would not be aided by the installation of parachutes as they involve things like flying into mountains/trees in bad weather or accidents involving take-off and landing (for which a parachute is unlikely to be able to deploy quickly enough).
Secondly, the vast majority of light aircraft flying today are over 10 years old. That means the installation of parachutes would require expensive refits. This would then require reissuing of type certificates or the recertification of aircraft to carry this new equipment. As many of the light aircraft flying today come from companies that have folded, the modern company carrying their type certificate is unlikely to put in the cash for the cost of the certification. And with so many different aircraft out there (each of which is unique) it is unlikely the parachute manufacturer could afford to pay for the qualification itself. Hence i can understand why the CAA is not permitting the retrofitting of old light aircraft with this equipment - it would be a very expensive operation and the chances of quick and dodgy jobs being done are very high.
Lastly, there is an argument that the use of parachutes on light aircraft are actually a danger as they encourage people to be more reckless and more willing to push the boundaries of what their aircraft is capable of because they have that safety net. I'm not 100% convinced by this as most pilots i know are incredibly sensible people, who understand just how expensive an aircraft is to both buy and repair and wouldnt do anything to risk adding more cost to their already expensive hobby. But there are always idiots...
My personal opinion is that the use of parachutes in new light aircraft should be allowed if those aircraft are certified to carry a parachute (even if its only an optional extra). Old aircraft which have not been certified for it should not be allowed to carry a parachute. Simple as that.
Just my 2p.
People dont (to the best of my knowledge) receive extra funding for coming from a different ethnic group. You may receive more or less based on your income but that has bugger all to do with race or ethnicity.
So it was probably something along the lines of reducing the child support for a family with two children so that they only got the money for one of the children not both...
So whilst your making a point about equality, the rules are already written to be as equal as possible and you just come across sounding like a condescending twat. Probably next time try to write with a little more balance...
Casting of any metallic material is hugely more expensive then machining. Even if you machine away 95% of a metallic block and take hours to do it, it will still usually work out at roughly half the price of the casting. Hence why so much is machined, and why you dont see LiquidMetal MacBook cases.
I'm also not sure i agree with your statement that without a crystal lattice there are no weak points for failures. Diamond, the hardest structure on the planet is made up of a crystal lattice of carbon atoms which is it what gives it its strength. Bucky balls derive there extreme long life from their crystalline lattice. Crystal lattice networks tend to propogate cracks more readily when there are excessive amounts of impurities present. I have no idea how a completely non-lattice structure would maintain its shape and strength.
It does sound like a very interesting material and i think i will go away and read some more but i think some of your assumptions on the manufacturing side are a little overly optimistic...
Hi Nader, i'm not flaming or anything, but when do you find you actually need Acrobat?
I have it on my work machine here but discovered that Office 2007 has a function to create pdf's (the main function i used Acrobat for previously) and actually does a very good job of it (including all links, etc which i normally got out of Acrobat). Its also significantly faster.
The only function in Acrobat i havent found a replacement for is condensing multiple pdfs into a single pdf file (my work scanner is an old thing which cant manage multiple page scans). For this reason Acrobat is still on my work desktop but it never gets used if i can help it.
So I'm just wondering what other tasks you need it for which you cant find replacement programs?
... If the CPS are not willing to defend their position despite having placed onerous restrictions on the defendent (not being able to see your daughter is pretty friggin onerous in my book) then surely he could sue under some sort of Malicious Prosecution and/or Slander/Libel laws...
A significant pay out for destroying a mans life might make the CPS a little less prone to destroying people's lives for the hell of it!
The cops were called when they failed to return from they're hike. So this was a search and rescue operation (which luckily turned out not to be required). This had nothing to do with the fact they were naturists.
Seriously, try reading the article next time rather then auto-ranitng a Daily Fail response...
Why have they waited so long to come out on the side of sanity?
The debate has raged for months (the debate being Conroy saying we neeed it and the rest of Australia saying it wont work/we dont want it), and only now they come out and say they're against it!
I'll withhold judgement on whether this is an actual scrapping of the firewall or a "re-imagining" until i see the detailed plan of the liberals...
"People will find it's very useful to have devices that remember what you want to do, because you forgot ... "
Oh im sorry Google i forgot that i want a device to remember everything that i forgot because naturally i forget everything thats important for me to do. I only remember the unimportant stuff like remembering not to click on google ads, not to use google search and to criticise Eric Schmidt at every available opportunity...
Eric Schmidt is quickly beginning to make Bill Gates and Steve Jobs look like angels. They just wanted to control competition and our purchases, Eric Shcmidt wants to control everything we do... Guess which one im more worried about!!!
Michelle you can dislike Facebook or you want, but just cause it doesnt have a purpose for you, does not mean it doesnt have a purpose for other people (like myself). Thats like saying that because we have aircraft, why would anyone have need of a helicopter?
For me Facebook is superb for keeping in touch with friends, because i am in a job where i move country every 6-12 month (8 countries in the last 5 years so far) naturally i make great friends in each of those countries and so I want to stay in touch with them all. However, i also change mobile phone numbers regularly so staying in touch with everyone by phone would be a right pain in the butt. Facebook lets me see a brief update of where my freinds are and what theyre up to. Without the need to send out a hundred emails a week. I can also send direct messages to people when i want to.
Ive never touched the games or other bollocks attached to Facebook (and i have no intention of doing so in the future), but for just keeping in touch with people in different cities and countries i find it fantastic.
So just keep in mind, that whilst something might not work for you, that does not mean it doesnt have a purpose for someone else.
The difference is that when you see someone walking down the street carrying a cattle prod, its obvious theyre carrying a cattle prod, and your going to pay attention to what they do with it.
If you see someone carrying a phone, your not going to pay any real attention and so you put yourself in a lot of danger of being shocked when your backs turned.
Oh and i hope he didnt claim they were just for him - he ordered 20 of them! Tell me he didnt have something nefarious planned with that!
Who the hell comes up with these operation names?
Someone who has been watching the Simpsons a little too much perhaps?
Have you checked the queens lineage recently?
Not if this is a Day of the Triffids type event! Then you wont see anything.... ever... again...
We're talking about Wikipedia and Wikimedia here... They are absolutely nothing to do with Wikileaks...
Do try and read the article next time...
... who considers chopping down trees to get data on climate change to be just a little bit stupid?
Considering that in one tree you have potentially up to 500 years of continuous data. You then go and cut it down to find out that data, but in doing so your cutting off any chance to increase the record! Surely there must be some way to do this research without needing to chop down the tree...
Wont someone think of the environment.... Oh, right...
... identifies those sort of people who are the hardcore evangelists of all things Apple. Just as there are the hardcore evangelists of all things Linux, Open Source, Climate Change, etc.
For those people (and im sure we've all come across them) this is actually a pretty good understanding and covers things pretty well. However, the majority of people in the world do not end up in one of these categories, at least not for various electronics. We just buy the products that we a) think will do the best job, and b) that we can afford.
I would categorise most people on a site like El Reg to be primarily in this second category, although check any thread on the site that is about Israel, Google, MS, Apple, climate change, etc and at least one or two rabid fanatics will appear. Its those people's responses which respond to the type identified by this research...