14 posts • joined Monday 25th June 2007 13:00 GMT
in this thread...
people getting trolled as though this was actually 4chan.
Not our fault
Seriously, the only reason why chains like this exist and have driven out the smaller guys is because of the customer's demand for cheaper and cheaper things. We really on the whole don't care about quality so long as it is dirt cheap and in fact we often don't care that much about price and are happy to buy expensive rubbish from say Tesco instead of buying good quality for less at say Lidl's (obviously only the food). Its all about marketing (ie, people _think_ tesco is cheap) and profit (screwing the supply chain). and its all driven my us, the guilible uninformed consumer. All the companies were doing were trying to give the customer what he wanted: cheapness. If they didn't build their business on dodgy financial borrowing to enable this, they'd have long disappeared. For this very reason the end of the high street happened long ago when all the little stores were driven out by the large companies and their out of town retail parks (obviously this wasn't helped by retarded city planners refusing to solve congestion and charge reasonable prices for parking). Its going to be really interesting to see what takes their place as the usual 'build some flats' option is available either. I wonder if more online firms are going to branch out into delivery, seen it a bit with local farms etc, don't spose there is any money in it though. But interesting exciting times ahead! More micro breweries please!
"If the apostrophe in "people's" is supposed to go before the S because "people" is already plural, why does it still go after the S in children? (e.g., "the childrens' hats")
"Children" is the plural or child, just as "people" is the plural of person."
because your a idiot? its "children's hats"
you guys are such idiots. Atheists _believe_ there is no God, because there is no evidence for it. In so much so as they accept it as fact until proven otherwise. Agnostics are just: 'i dunno?' - ie, idiots, but not as much idiots as religious people. This means Atheists believe there is no God but are open to the possibility is someone can demonstrate it scientifically. As with all things scientific. Yes, its fairly weak, but its probably to appease all you idiots who demand things such as: 'evolution is a theory, stop spouting it as fact??!! ! mleh mleh'. so, get this:
Theory: the is a God
Evidence: ermm...... what?
Conclusion: no God. (however, feel free to produce some evidence to back up your theory some time).
OK, even this is BS because you can't base a theory on nothing. Just because you can think of something (hmm, like, you all owe me £10grand) doesn't mean its a theory.
so basically. 'probably' no God is correct, technically. But in normal speech, i agree we'd say: 'there is no God, retard' (because we usually have to summarise it like that to not overload your brain with such a complicated abstract concept such as probability.) Is God more complex than probability - no, thats why millions of people understand God, but can't do simple maths.
links to page 2 etc
guys, the page links (links to page 2, 3 etc) are still screwed. I'm using IE. I see they have moved from the bottom right to now the bar above the article, but 1) we need them at the bottom of the article (so you don't have to scroll back up to the top once you read it to go to the next page and so you know there are more pages!) and 2) they are currently on top of something else, possible a 'rate this article'? do you have that? I can't tell. But as i've said, they really need to go on the 'post a comment' bar.
hahaha, what are the page links doing all the way over and down there?? I've just read 4 articles and thought they ended rather abruptly without making a point. mate has just done the same. the page links need to go somewhere near the comments and post comments bar. not in the second column at the bottom of the screen.
this is EA
you've handed over the money already!
no different to BF2 (last EA game i bought, and will buy for a long time), BF2142, BF2142x2, warhammer online. its hilarious. although I suppose you can at least still play offline, you couldn't even do that with BF2, you had to log in online to play offine....? obviously, noob. This along with other hilarious cash cow devices such as EA demanding about £2000 a year for a (ranked) server you could only get from one place. still, at least the games are good.............? screw EA, screw them in the a$$.
I'm sure a lot of people agree it shouldn't be taught, but hang on one second...
"It is irrelevant whether the people being taught agree with the teaching or not, education should be about teaching the truth, and the accepted theories and ideas"
wow, now _that_ would be a great way to completely ignore the whole point of science and set about creating a totalitarian state the commies and George would be proud of. The point of science is to think and evaluate, not blindly accept. Its nothing to do with respect granted, but you can't just sweep creationism under the carpet and hope it goes away. Yes it should not be taught as a scientific theory in the same way as evolution, but we do need to educate people about it - the same goes for any religious hocus pokery 1) teach them the science behind it (like theories of why religion came about, the history behind it, what came first - morals or religion, etc etc) and then 2) teach them to think for themselves and question things (why the hell are religious people considered 'moral' when they need a book/ some idiot to tell them how to behave) The key out of this is education and free thinking. No, the 2 keys are education, free thining and evidence. No, the 3 keys are...
Chip and Sig
With a chip and signiture card does the liability rest with the retailer/ bank rather than the customer as with chip and pin?
'Change Making Machines'
"Newspapers can be quite useful things, can inflict the occasional dent on deserving targets and can cause some small changes, but they are most certainly not large-scale change-making machines."
come on, this is complete rubbish. Look at how terrified the public are now after having 'terror' this and 'al-qaeda' that constantly thrown in their face compared with when the IRA was actually bombing and killing us (or the germans for that matter). large scale change-making machines they _exactly_ are. the problem that the guardian is facing is that they are trying to affect people's actions, rather than their opinion. If they just carried on spouting 'omg, we're all gonna die from global warming, possible links to conventional lightbulbs' people would begin to accept this and then act on their own.
hurray! one small victory for intelligence over ignorance.