(Watch out for a truck with a green goblin face on the front...)
6822 posts • joined 19 Jan 2007
Isn't that tautologous?
... Great, so what's the drawback?
Well you need to bring this Scanning Tunnelling Electron Microscope along with you...
.. own goal for Failbook!
... how well these cars are going to be able to deal with narrow side roads in British cities where there are vehicles going in both directions, but with cars parked on both sides meaning there's only room for one at a time and it's necessary for someone to back up into a gap to let the other vehicle through etc...
Yes, my first reaction was "Good luck with that!"
... what if it *had* been something suspicious and the Police had just dismissed it or failed to investigate?
It was only a short time ago that two people died because Stirling Police didnt follow up on reports of a car accident, leaving a woman to lie there for three days before she was discovered. What if this hadn't been "a bag of animal bones", but evidence was lost because it wasn't deemed to be important?
I think you've rather missed my point which was exactly *that* just because someone might say "I don't use it, why should I pay for it?" ignores the fact that they still *benefit* from it.
We benefit from a non-commercial BBC, not least because if the BBC *did* go commercial, it would suck a huge amount of advertising revenue away from other broadcasters, thus reducing choice.
I don't have children, why should I have to pay taxes that go to schools?
I don't have a car, why should I pay taxes that go to roads?
I have private medical cover why should I pay taxes that go to the NHS?
etc etc etc...
... whilst they put on the rubber gloves...
Ah, but you see payments for contract workers come out of a different budget, so it's easy to claim that they're "saving money on wages"...
... of someone walking around with one of these phones whilst towing a bloody big amp and battery pack on a trolley behind them...?
> Unlike you I do not need sock puppets.
I await your evidence that I have *EVER* used a sock puppet account with... well, I was going to say "bated breath", but actually I won't be holding my breath because there is no such evidence.
I take it back, you're not Matt's sock puppet, because that's a good question you've asked him.
(Good luck on getting a reply, though...)
> there was just a news story where a criminal did attack someone with a pen stabbing her in the head...
Obviously, then, we should ban people from carrying pens...
"The NSA and GCHQ have not admitted to their acts.
"Those actions are criminal and they should be charged."
... embarrass the Government...
... for they are petty and full of malice...
I'd amend this to "that *almost* total fuckwit Teresa May" because she has, at least, seen sense and banned the use of Water Cannon in Britan...
> Isn't evidence gathered outside the law inadmissable?
Not here in England. We have no Fourth Amendment, no "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree" principle, in fact, there are very few principles at all where this sort of things is concerned...
Unfortunately, these days they seem to think that they should not only enforce the law, but decide what it is and whether it should apply to them too or not :-(
Blimey, do they send it Parcel Force...?
... the NSA didn't offer him a job...
A pox on both their houses...
... Call Centres as a service...
... and lots more questions...
Translation: Drag our freedoms down to the lowest common denominator.
And there's the rub. Any such "exceptions" will no doubt be surrounded by sufficient weasel phrases that any protections that these regulations offer will be ineffective because "national security".
How dare the workers ask for time off if they have children? Damnit, that gets in the way of this business making profits! If they want kids, they can do it in their *own* time.
"Future of the race?" Not my problem...
Why does the expression "Don't Ask, Don't Tell..." come to mind?
"And some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have left the oceans."
But now, no doubt, a whole bunch of others such as ftse.market and nyse.market will need to be defensively registered before the scammers go for those...
.... Kerching! Trebles all round, lads!
Hmm, how long ago was it that doctors were prescribing antibiotics for colds and other viral infections, even when they knew that they would have no beneficial effect, simply to get patients out of their waiting rooms? And what about parts of the world where you can buy antibiotics over the counter without prescription, take a few, feel better and not finish the course, thus helping resistant bacterial strains? And the only people objecting are those like the enviroMentalists (Oh, ho ho! Gosh, isn't that a clever name?) saying "Maybe this isn't a good idea", to which the pharmaceutical companies reply "whatever" and keep raking in the money?
As for Massive Debts, I'm sure we'll disagree on this, but personally I think the way to make a country's finances secure is not to keep building on the roof whilst undermining the foundations. Still, who cares when, to quote Douglas Adams, nobody is poor, at least nobody worth speaking of.
But the point is that these *weren't* problems until they got out of hand and then, suddely, the whole situation changed.
You may be happy to dismiss this as "ideology" (whilst merrily continuing with your own ideology), but some of us are not so casual as to say "hey, we've got plenty of energy, why should we worry?"
Oh, and, by the way, I do think that nuclear is a viable option, but you don't just wave a magic wand and have a nuclear power station appear, neither is it good for a country's finances when you get a foreign organisation (EDF) to build it for you with a dodgy deal that involves paying £90 billion to France and guaranteeing to pay double the price for the electricity it generates for 35 years!
PS WMDs? ROFL! You really are reaching now...
LucreLout: It seems to me that you're quite happy just to kick a problem down the road and say "Meh, I don't have to worry about it, let someone else deal with it whilst I concentrate on making money".
Fine, now have a nice deep breath of this concoction of Methane, Nitrous Oxide and Ozone...
Some interesting questions, I agree.
Now here's a couple for you: How much less fuel would the USA be using if their politicians hadn't caved to the automobile industry lobbying to define SUVs as light trucks, thus exempting them from fuel economy regulations?
How much less power would people be using if, instead of using AirCon or central heating, houses were better insulated which keeps temperatures more stable? (Of course this makes houses a bit more expensive to build...)
It is not simply a case of "getting more done with the same input", but also "getting the same done with less input". It's not either/ or, it can be both.
This morning's unprecedented solar eclipse is no cause for alarm...
The wise man changes his view depending on the facts. The fool changes the facts to fit his view.
In either case, as I've said before, I don't get involved in this increasingly silly and partisan argument, I'll just re-iterate the fact that we are using more energy than we ever have before and will keep on doing so, therefore we should use the energy we have more efficiently (note: this does not involve living in yurts or wearing hair shirts) that way we a) reduce emissions and b) buy ourselves sometime to get alternatives such as Fusion working.
Or the Daily Express whose headline writers have turned "This research won't lead directly to a cure for cancer" into them having found a cure for cancer...
+1 for the Snow Crash reference, but, just for interest, I did a search for CosaNostra Pizza and got a whole bunch of hits from *real* stores...!!
As I said "the "extremists" on both sides of the argument are known to do this!"
Ignoring the "Nar nar ne-nar nar" tone of the article, this is what science is all about: A set of facts do not agree with expectations, so established theories are re-examined and research is done to see whether it's a statistical fluke or there's something else at work.
We now know something that we didn't know before, we have more information which we can either ignore (the "extremists" on both sides of the argument are known to do this!) or apply it to the theories and improve them.
To quote Isaac Asimov: "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'" - Isaac Asimov
> "I’m told these are heavy metal acts that performed at the festival"
Not "Popular beat combos"?
Call me David will love this one...
If your moon has been damaged in an accident in the last billion years, you may be entitled to compensation.
Just call Xylpic, f!Tang and P+@#*$ for a No Win, No Fee quotation...
> What you need to understand is that psychopathy / sociopathy can not be cured.
I do understand that. I also understand that conditions like that can be treated and controlled and monitored, but simply locking someone up will do nothing to benefit the sufferer.
Still, that's not *your* problem is it...
And what criteria do you use to decide whether someone is "deserving" of your compassion?
Race? Colour? Creed? Sex? Country of birth? Employment status? Mental health? Money in the bank? Political views? Or just "Fuck you, I'm alright Jack!"?
Fortunately not all of us think like you.
Dear me, LL, why are you so hung up about my A Levels?
In any case, perhaps you can tell me how much money Gideon has borrowed since the Tories came to power? How much *further* in debt has he put us?
At least I have learned the difference between a deficit and a debt...
"... and has to reguarly pay to renew, even though they don't do anything with them, in an effort to stop people profiting from its name"
... Which one is that?
The one that looks like a 3 1/2" floppy disk.
... What's one of those...?