4079 posts • joined Friday 19th January 2007 17:59 GMT
Gods forbid that anyone should supply weapons to regimes like, oh, I don't know, Libya, for instance...
@No-one's mentioned the books
Well I haven't for a good reason: I was trying to repress the memory of Blade Runner 2 which tried (and completely failed) to square the circle between Do Androids... and the film Blade Runner and was a hopeless mish-mash that failed to comprehend that the two were entirely different entities.
Blofeld did it first!
@I just wish
Whereas I wish that the arrogant pillocks who are in power would stop thinking that *they* know best for the rest of us and would all decide to emigrate to the middle of nowhere so they can pass all the laws they want to their heart's content and enjoy living under their own rule whilst the rest of us are allowed to get on with our lives!
Does that mean they're working flat out or just that they're lying down on the job?
Also speaking as a surfer...
... you've got more chance of dying in an accident on the way to or from the beach than you have of being a victim of a shark attack.
Try doing some research which might improve your "thinkin'"
And there is one thing I can't tolerate...
... which is people's instant knee-jerk thoughtless reaction to an accusation that someone is abusing children (or providing such images) or that it's obviously copyright infringement without actually thinking "we've only got the Police's word for this".
"everyone knows how porn is used"
"If “everybody knows” such-and-such, then it ain’t so, by at least ten thousand to one." - Lazarus Long (via Robert A Heinlein).
Once again I mention that I make leather bondage gear. There are times when I've seen something on a website etc that has made me go "Damn, I never thought of that, what a great idea for a new product...!"
Who says you can't enjoy Business Research? :-)
Belle de Jour was an *escort* not a pornographer and she's a Research Scientist with specialisations in developmental neurotoxicology and cancer epidemiology, she has a PhD in informatics, epidemiology and forensic science.
Let me see: ignorant person makes Straw Man argument based on their own lack of knowledge. Colour me unsurprised...!
"We hoped the company would promise...
"... a future version of the prosthetic with limited precognition, allowing it to walk the owner away from unseen danger. But it didn't."
Thank Zarquon for that! Remember the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation Happy Vertical People Transporters?
Imagine what would happen if your artificial leg suddenly decided it wanted participation in the direction decision making process and went on strike or started walking in the opposite direction...
(Mine's the one with the book in the pocket that has "Don't Panic" written in large friendly letters on the cover)
"The sentences given will be a warning...
"... to anyone considering committing this type of fraud"
Does *anyone* really believe this sort of bollocks?
People commit this sort of fraud because they think they can get away with it, if they didn't, they wouldn't do it. They don't give a toss about any potential sentence they may get.
But, as usual, the people who *actually* get away scot free are the ones who had such lax security measures in place that the fraud could happen in the first place!
Well it would...
... if it wasn't the same sort of skewed and nonsensical rationale which means that, in the UK, under the Dangerous Pictures Act an image taken from a film can be illegal even if the film itself isn't!
(Oh and the same goes for the "Dangerous Cartoons" Act...)
@Pete and Dud?
Whilst it does sound a bit like Pete and Dud, it's actually Fred Colon and Nobby Nobbs! :-)
Anyone remember the old Dragon's Lair video disk game?
Not to denigrate this guy's achievement at all, but the moves on DL were a fixed sequence such that I could stand with my back to the machine, hands behind me and all I'd need was for someone to say "Ok, it's the Lizard King starting to the left" and I could go through the whole level without looking :-)
@UNTIL YOU WENT AND LOOKED FOR IT !
Ah, but you have to remember that it's just *knowing* that it's out there which is the problem!
People like Wacky Jacqui simply *cannot* bear the idea of others looking at things they don't like, hence the desire to pass the legislation like the Dangerous Pictures and Dangerous Cartoons acts.
It's laughable that she says "The internet service providers need to take more responsibility." err, no Jacqui it's *YOU* who needs to take more responsibility and understand that everyone else *also* needs to take responsibility for what they (or their children) look at. We don't need your Nanny State saying "We think this is bad for you, so *you* are not allowed to see it".
" I don't agree with the argument that...
"... if we restrict anything available on the internet we'll turn into China."
Of course not, Jacqui, just like you never agreed with *anything* that didn't fit with your own personal set of prejudices and bigotry, but you still thought that your personal tastes ought to govern what everyone else is allowed to see and read...
There's a very interesting documentary...
... showing extremely intelligent sheep who can drive tractors, build mechanical devices, perform group calisthenics and much more besides.
It can be seen on CBBC channel or there's more information here http://www.shaunthesheep.com/
You're missing the point.
I have a website for my business selling leather bondage gear, it hosts my catalogue, lets people by products etc.
What it does *not* do is supply the sort of contact linking and "like" functionality available to Facebook users and for me to try to emulate that would be massively expensive and time consuming.
I don't want to have to re-invent the wheel and create the Affordable Leather Products Social Networking site when there's something already available out there, but neither do I want to spend time and effort setting such a site up (something which I had been considering) if I can suddenly and without warning or explanation, find all that work wiped out because one person has complained to Facebook that they don't like what I do.
Facebook just need to engage in some form of consistency in their decision making, something which sadly appears to be lacking right now.
@Am I missing something?
Nope, Google are.
We're constantly warned to watch out for spoof/ scam/ phishing sites and the URL is one simple way of checking this. Without it we lose an important safety measure.
God hates figs!
See Mark 11:12-14
"It was a very different, very BRUTAL, world back then - to try and apply today's morality to it is just idiotic."
Yet there are those from the church who want to apply the morality of two thousand or more years ago to the world today!
Please, do us all a favour and don't let this discussion turn into an irrelevant Pro/ Anti Israel rant fest...
Erm, perhaps they're not aware that that's a pretty good positive result already!!
... all that's needed is for the bookies to have a stooge in the crowd with a noticeable banner/ flag/ brightly coloured shirt which gets removed/ waved/ covered over when they want an "accidental" no ball...
... What's that in linguini?
If you want to cover this on a fansite...
.. you'd better believe that it's the greatest thing since the lightsabre.
Otherwise We'll find your lack of faith disturbing...
"You can only put so much in one bill."
Really? See the last Government's "Christmas Tree" Bills where everybody got a chance to hang something on it, so much so that the majority of it was never debated by our elected representatives and even the Lords didn't have the time to go through it all.
As you say, the risk is that, once this (hopefully) goes through, any other such repeals/ reformations will be kicked into the long long grass with a "Well, we've spent a lot of time on this, so now we want to go on to something else".
Meanwhile people will still be open to arrest for dangerous pictures/ cartoons/ video clips of Tony the Tiger etc...
... they don't have the equivalent of the Women's Institute which the last Government tried to recruit to "protect women from exploitation" by writing strong letters to newspapers that had ads for Escorts?
"if police say...
"...they have reasonable grounds to believe they're being used for criminal activity"
Hmm, so what about those pesky things called "Evidence" and "Proof"? Show us those and we'll all say "yes, go ahead", but not simply "we believe..." because that is open to abuse (or vindictiveness or simple stupidity)