Re: "Walking Street"
Does it mean anything like the old English lane where prostitutes used to frequent?
493 posts • joined 14 Jun 2011
Does it mean anything like the old English lane where prostitutes used to frequent?
I encourage all of my customers to have a password book these days. I tell them to write all their passwords in it. "Nobody's going to break in to your house to steal your passwords" I tell them. "Burglars are after iPads and jewellery and cash. If someone is breaking in to your house to steal your passwords, they're from the intelligence agencies, and you have far more serious problems than I can help you with".
It'll certainly be the first time since they ruined The Sky at Night.
I don't use Linux and I never have done. I don't hate MS. But let me tell you about my week.
Last night about 9:30pm I logged on to my computer for the first time all day to find that Outlook was broken. It turned out that an update had borked it. Cue 60 minutes of tech troubleshooting at the very end of a very long day indeed.
This morning I picked up a computer running Office 2013 which refuses to acknowledge the licence that was installed on it last week. This morning I fixed a Windows 7 Pro machine which had somehow decided it had an illegal copy of Win7 on it.
This afternoon I'm backing up the files from one machine which has totally failed (due to MS updates in Win10). Yesterday I did the same to another machine which has totally failed (due to MS updates in Win10). This weekend I will be - guess what - restoring those machines to factory settings and restoring all the files and then I can return them to the customers next week.
It's my job. Fine. But my job is being made 20 x harder by Microsoft NOT DOING SOME BASIC FUCKING TESTS BEFORE THEY ROLL OUT A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM OR A FEW UPDATES.
I have two dead Win10 computers from clients on my desk and neither will work. One has the 'left mouse click doesn't work' bug and the other has the 'screen flash' bug. Revert to Win7 and 8.1 for both of them, because older operating systems which haven't been released 12 months before they're stable don't crash and burn like this.
Yes I did know that. One of the reasons for the rise in aridity was forest felling.
The same goes for Spain. Iberia was a very wealthy province and supplied vast quantities of grain to the late Empire. In the middle ages the forests were cut down to create grasslands for Merino sheep to graze. The rains washed the soils away and the grain production was lost.
In both cases the link is the removal of trees. North Africa is arid now but it doesn't have to be. Start with planting tough grasses, build up the topsoil. Dredge it from the sea if need be. Plant bushes, plant trees. And the aridity falls and you can grow more crops.
Expensive but certainly cheaper than the Paris Conference's plan for rich nations to give all of their money to poor nations as some sort of post-colonial guilt trip.
The EU is setting aside huge tracts of land for wildlife that could be taken in to production. Russian agriculture is 40 years behind us technologically and far more yield per hectare is available there. If the temperature is warming then Canadian production as well as Russian production will increase with the longer growing season.
That's not even starting to look at the possibility of production in the third world nations who, with the right technology and infrastructure, will produce huge surpluses. Look at Kenya for an example. They make large amounts of hard currency exporting high quality cash crops to Europe.
The Sahara's problem is aridity. The Brazilian rainforest rarely drops below 26C, but it's wet, so there is a profusion of life.
You can import food, even if it's 'too hot' to grow food. Not that it's ever 'too hot', because plants cope with it. What they don't cope with is aridity. But it's easy to import food, particularly for a rich country like the UAE surrounded by poorer countries who can produce cash crops that can be exported.
It's also unbelievably expensive. You have to dig all of that stuff out of the ground, build strong walls (far stronger than building up) to stop the sides caving in. You have to find clever ways to get sunlight down in to the depths. Cost, cost, cost.
Humans don't like living like that. They don't WANT to live like that. This is often the problem with such grand ideas. They rarely take in to account the humans at the centre of the architecture. It's why Brutalist buildings have been loved by academics and architects and universally despised by the people who actually have to live in or use them. Run the trains and buses and cars underground, fine. But don't expect humans to turn troglodyte.
You say that the provision 'undermines the fundamental principles of democracy'. I disagree, it is sovereignty to which you refer, and yes it does.
Many things do. The EU undermines nation states' sovereignty by putting its legislation above theirs. All international agreements undermine sovereignty. The UN convention on the rights of the child undermines sovereignty.
What matters is whether or not the price paid for loss of sovereignty outweighs the gains in other areas.
I think age is the least of my problems when I look down the job specification.
Why don't they just say 'Has to have been a US Air Force Pilot, Like Always' and have done with it?
I don't fit any of the criteria for this one, so there must be one that takes people with arts degrees who get dizzy on a swing and have 1000 hours of accredited flight time on Falcon 3.0.
I always misheard that track.
It's the patriarchy that forced her to urinate in public. They're behind everything. They're a bit like a cross between reptiloids and the illuminati.
Thanks for this useful information. I will be doing it on every customer's machine I see.
No, it's just Bob 'I hate Microsoft' Vistakin telling us all, once again, that he hates Microsoft.
I'm fairly sure a Skype telephone number went from £6 a year to £20 a year very recently. As a consequence of that I got rid of one of my Skype telephone numbers. I don't mind paying a fair price but I object to being gouged.
"Greetings and Salutations and welcome to the Peterborough Police Department. If you'd prefer an automated response, press 1 now."
If the legislation is poorly drafted then it's for Parliament to sort out. That's their job. They should be holding the government to account.
I don't agree that abrogating the ECHR would lead to dogs and cats living together and mass hysteria, btw. We managed quite adequately before we had legislation allowing terrorists to sue our soldiers for shooting them. If you want an example of feature creep, then RIPA is a good one but the extension of the powers of the judiciary through their interpretation (not implementation but interpretation) of the HRA is just as good.
One of my big concerns is how much legislation is now being decided by judges. By that I mean that a government (Labour or Tory or coalition) creates legislation and rolls it out, and then someone (for example) challenges it on 'human rights' grounds and a judge decides that according to that legislation government can't do what it was going to do.
Parliament is either sovereign or it isn't. This isn't America where the judiciary is political and its job is to implement the constitution according to the letter of the law. I am uncomfortable with the government spying on people because I know they'll abuse any powers they give themselves but I'm also uncomfortable with expecting the judiciary to police the executive in this way.
I don't know if there's a good or clever or better answer. A healthy dose of Reading 1984 And Not Treating It Like A Fucking Manual would certainly help our politicos, but beyond that - I don't know.
No room for passengers though.
The Lord Vetinari school of thought.
Is that Russian peasant lying in the mud that he just acquired the two loaves of bread from.
Someone tell Seamus Milne, he'll be on that website quicker than you can say gulag.
A $100 keyboard that's worse than the old keyboard is not a 4/5 keyboard.
Well my Firefox has a VLC, two Office 2010, Flash, Shockwave, Foxit Reader, Google Earth, Picasa and a couple of others. I could probably do without any of them though.
I'm not fussed by it because we can't use it for anything in the distant or near future. We can use the asteroid belt, we can use knowledge about Jupiter's trojan points Knowledge about Venus gets us no closer to conquering the solar system and expanding human activity beyond earth.
Yes, it would have been a good thing. There is going to be a crash, and thanks to the unnecessary bailout it's going to be far worse and far bigger than it would have been, and we have no money left to fix it because it was all spent the first time. And we have the addition of the moral hazard, because everyone now knows it doesn't matter how much you fuck up, the taxpayer will bail you out.
Dollars, more like.
Water. Now can we crack on and colonise the damn planet, please?
Did Thomas Covenant survive beyond half way through his second book? Then he's doing better than a sympathetic GoT character.
You're not the only one. I have a lot of sympathy for that. I was bought the box set of 7 books and by the end of the fourth one I had pretty much lost interest. Every time I found someone to start rooting for, bang, they're killed in a tiresome way. I too reached the point when I simply didn't care who anyone was or how they were going to die.
I know that good things happen to bad people and vice versa, and I'm no stranger to bleak storylines. I've got Seven on my DVD shelf. But the sheer unremitting misery of Martin's storyline and his determination to pulverise every human in his books with even an ounce of humanity palls after 130,000 words.
Yes Eddie Murphy should get a lifetime bar from the UK, for Norbit and The Adventures of Pluto Nash.
That's my problem with so much 'art'. It's paid for by the taxpayer and so the 'artist' can get away with any old shit because the public sector will spend it and doesn't really care and the artist knows they can fob off their d-grade ideas and if the people hate it, well, that's just the proles and they never appreciate 'art'.
Back to the good old days, please, where the super rich are the patrons and not the general public. We'd soon see a whittling out of 25ft tall buttplugs and dirty beds.
I think it's more that if we're spending £35+ per month on a phone, rather than £12 per month, we'd like it to look as expensive is as it is.
If I were reviewing this car, I would certainly dedicate a page or two to listing its virtues, and admiring the clever engineering. However, a page needs to be produced showing the weaknesses of the car, amongst which are the unattractive nature, the cost, the shortage of space and the fact that it is considerably slower than the equivalent petrol or diesel which is available for 60% of the price. It is, in fact, considerably slower than every single vehicle in its price band. If you choose to cluck your tongue at the selfishness and moral inferiority of people who make purchasing decisions based upon performance and handling, that's up to you. But they will make those decisions in that way regardless of your snooty attitude to them.
Well no, you didn't say any of those things but perhaps you ought to have done. 0-60 in over 12 seconds is SLOW. Slow and dull. You didn't say it was short of space but it clearly is from the pictures you've posted. It IS an unattractive car. And it is also VERY expensive for what it is. I'm glad that you're very rich and don't think that £50k is much for a car, but I'm not, and I do.
It's not a matter of whether or not the world 'stops at Dover'. I'm not being parochial. Unless you spend a majority of your time driving on the right then a LHD car is more dangerous to drive in the UK.
From what I can google, they scrapped the idea of producing it in favour of designing another one. I think it's a non-starter. Too slow, too expensive and from the pictures I can see absolutely no boot space (which would be the main reason someone would want to own a car in a city (to be able to move stuff around that you can't take on a bus)).
Apart from being slow, poor to handle, short of internal space, unattractive, far too expensive and entirely unsuitable for British roads due to being left hand drive, it's great?
The author is definitely a glass-half-full person.
If they had a decent amount of pigs they could go Full Thunderdome and produce methane.
I'm happy to be wrong if that's the case. :)
I'm not talking about the trim. I'm talking about what would once have been called the coachwork. Who's, for example, going to be producing the centre console for a 1992 Escort Cosworth in 50 years' time? It's made of plastic, it's an interior item. But it'll start to degrade and crack just like all plastics do.
Earlier posts talked about the electronics failing in modern cars which means they won't be around and that's true. But that's fixable by hobbyists - witness the Gameboy on a credit card and the ZX Spectrum toys that have been kickstarted.
What's not going to be replaceable is the plastic interiors. Those injection moulded car parts will start to break and fall apart in 30 or 40 years' time. And nobody will have the die moulds or the equipment to make new ones.
You'd have the twatterati on to you in a flash. And remember her hubby is Ian Katz, once editor at the Guardian who has now somehow found a job at the BBC. Don't know HOW that happened, moving from the Guardian to the Beeb. Still, impartiality, it's in their genes.
Not knowing anything about her, I assumed she was related to the Southend Kardashians, noted for their enormous family, their tarmaccing skills and their tendency to relieve churches of the unwanted lead from their roofs.
She'll probably decide to call her next daughter Thalidomide. "Wot a pre'y name, sahnds just like a Greek I'land, dunnit".
Nothing that country does makes sense.
I think we should ask Chris Rock:
Yes, it should be 'declining fewer slowly'.