Ah, so they're *friendly* radioactive isotopes...!
6066 posts • joined 19 Jan 2007
Ah, so they're *friendly* radioactive isotopes...!
Sure, pretty limited radioactive fallouts.
But the fall out from terrorist revenge attacks and suicide bombers...???
... you like to sleep on your front...?
Fine, if you can do better, write a script and send it in to the BBC.
(Better put it through a spell checker first, though...)
.... And Don't Blink!
I have to wonder whether the author of this article also bitches that nobody's writing stories like those from the Golden Age of SF between the 1930s and the 1950s any more.
Well, oddly, Doctor Who, like all other Sci-Fi, grows and changes according to the times it's in. So much SF is a reflection of the social conditions in which it is written (compare the Cyberpunk of the 1980s with Banks' Culture stories for example)
Each Doctor is different, to expect them to all be the same would be to put the series into a strait-jacket churning out the same old stuff over and over again which would be tedious beyond belief.
Instead we have developing characters and story arcs (including the wonderful "backwards arc" of River Song) and still the Silence one continues. If that's not your thing, please feel free to go back to the three R's of Rockets, Rayguns and Robots, but let those of us who appreciate a bit more subtlety on their SF enjoy what is a great series *now*.
Not "Dexter's Lab"?
... that people get the leadership they deserve.
... for Firefox 10 which, by my reckoning, should be out next week...
... that several prominent rock musicians (eg Ozzy Osborne to name just one) thought that This is Spinal Tap was real because they had had events like getting lost backstage actually happen to them!
"All operators"? Or all *Apple Approved* operators? And don't forget that you will need to get the operators to *agree* to let you switch...
... better get themselves a good patent lawyer...!
I agree with ratfox, this sounds suspiciously like an insurance job...! ;-)
"Unfortunate"? Or was is that she lost control because she was driving *too fast* for the "treacherous conditions"?
The recent tragedy on the M5 shows the dangers of driving too close together and too fast for the conditions, yet still idiots do that and then consider themselves "unfortunate" when they get involved in accidents.
A classic old game which El Reg should do a retrospective of :-)
... household chemicals have warnings printed on them, so do cars "Objects in the mirror are closer than they appear", plus you have to take a driving test but not a firearms test, hot tubs have warnings and thermostats...
... in a molecular car.
'Cos a molecular car,
Won't go that far!
Ah yes, "The Good, The Bad and the Lemmings", "How Much is that Lemming in the Window" and, of course the classic "Oh Little Town of Bethle-lem"! :-)
And car drivers etc need to actually *LOOK* properly before making a manoeuvre rather than thinking "ok, I can't see another car, it must be safe".
"Sorry, Mate, I Didn't See You" just means that the driver didn't look properly in the first place.
... don't save lives so much as good observation and proper riding plans do, they just piss off other people *after* you've gone past because they'll be hearing you for the next mile.
The only problem I see with electric drive is that makes it harder to judge your speed "by ear" simply by knowing what note your engine makes in which gear.
Oh and as for "88 mph that will get you little cred from the local two-wheeled community" that's bollocks, as long as you can flick it through the twisties, that's what matters!
... that the burden of proof is on the bank, not the customer.
Right, and that's guaranteed to stop banks from trying to fob customers off with "It's your fault, we're not paying out" claims...!
... Da da dah dum!
(I actually had the Captain Scarlet uniform when I was *very* young!)
... the League of Cattle Mutilators...
(Hmm, no Illuminati icon, the Alien one will have to do ;-) )
... have a Patent on the God Particle...?
"...making it look as if we give a damn what the public wants and let's them think that by signing a petition something will actually change."
There, fixed it for you.
Seriously, though, if you want to at least have a chance of anyone paying any attention to you, write to or e-mail your MP via http://www.theyworkforyou.com
ITTM "trace those whose online activity might endanger the positions of a bunch of arrogant and corrupt despotic dictators who know that they will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes...!"
... has nobody made the obligatory Battlestar Galactica reference yet...?
Yep, let's hear it for Weasel Clauses! "You have these rights, apart from the times when we decide that you shouldn't be allowed them"
"Oh, whenever we feel like it..."
This is what worries me about the idea of this country having a written Constitution, it's a great idea, but unless rights are stated as absolutes, this sort of weaseling means that rights are only granted at the behest of the state and can be taken away at their whim :-(
... in fact the exact same one shown in your image, *with* the same stickers on it!
And you know what? It works! Why the hell would I, running a one-man business, need to faff around with (let alone pay for) "clouds", smartphones, fondle slabs or any other such "OMG it's shiny, we have to have it!" nonsense?
As for "there is a real business need for these solutions", whose business is this, exactly? Mine, or the people trying to flog the stuff?
... more pork and empire building, then...
... what their bill for roaming charges will be like...!
... she said her name was Jenny!
"I can get anything I will ever need in life within a two hour's round-trip from where I sit as I type"
Do you have nothing better to do than spend a couple of hours driving to buy something when, instead, you could get it with a few clicks of a mouse?
And how much petrol (or diesel) do you burn whilst doing that? And how much does that item cost? Are you really willing to spend extra time and money buying something from someone with a steady gaze and a firm handshake (something which any con-man worth his salt naturally practices carefully) when you can get it cheaper and more easily and delivered to your door just so you can avoid using cards?
And I was just about to upvote you for what seemed to be an amusing post...!
So TomTom gives you the ability to report map errors, but instead of doing so (by activating the button that lets you record the position of a map error), you choose, instead, to bitch about the fact that it's *their* responsibility to fix the mistakes.
Of course given that you won't *tell* them where the mistakes are...
BTW You might try installing TomTom Home on your PC, in which case you can connect your Sat Nav up to it, click on the button that runs a simulation of the device on screen and then access the locations of the map errors and type in details from your keyboard at your convenience.
Technology, it's wonderful if you actually try using it properly...
"... has met with cabinet officials to discuss the reviews of major contracts and to share what they have learned."
And found out that a) politicians cannot write a sensible contract or bring in a project on time or on budget, but b) that doesn't matter because a few years down the line there'll be a lucrative directorship available...
Surely that's ++ungood :-)
... "go thermonuclear"
Erm, so what were they doing beforehand...?
... The Big Bang Theory is still going strong.
Probably something to do with it actually being funny...
Ah, now you're trying to use me as a scapegoat for your failure to understand what an ad hominem argument is.
Feel free to have the last word, I've wasted enough time on this.
Your whole post boils down to one single point: "if it addresses these attitudes [...] ‘pour encourager les autres’"
If you're not aware, the origin of that comment was in Voltaire's Candide and was in reference to the execution of Admiral John Byng for failing to relieve the beseiged British Garrison at Minorca
Byng was effectively made a scape-goat for the British Government and Admiralty's failure to do *their* job properly by a) not acting in time to deal with the expected French attack on Minorca and b) sending Byng out with ships that were undermanned and in a poor state of repair.
So you're looking to do pretty much the same, find a scapegoat to blame for *your* failures and if that requires locking them up for four years, well, that's not your problem, is it?
The fact that "make an example of them" sentences have been shown throughout history to be abject failures in dealing with the root causes of problems seems to be of no concern to you either.
Ah, right, so you're talking about a parenting failure.
Still, nice to see that, rather than learning from such mistakes (or, even better, teaching children a bit of common sense so they don't happen in the first place ) you're in favour of locking them up for four years instead.
How do you "inadvertently" have "a Face book inspire party" held in your house?
I suggest you might look at de-friending a few idiots rather than demanding they get four year jail sentences!
To paraphrase an old quote: "What if they gave a riot but nobody came?"
Not long after the recent riots, just down the road from me a party got out of hand with over 100 people turning up after word got out via Twatter etc.
The Police managed to herd them out of the side roads and contain them, but some drunken idiots "for a laugh" apparently started chanting "we're going to riot".
There was no riot, very little damage was caused, but should those idiots also get four year sentences?
"my job involves teaching students to become programmers."
Hey, I've had a great idea for solving your coursework problem, so I'm going to patent it, then if anyone else comes up with the same solution I can sue them and pay off my student loans with *their* money!!
... oh you know the rest.
... better than a personalised domain name!
'would you rather give people the power to have every post critical of, say, Orlowski removed from this site because it was "defamation"?'
Ah, but they never even get published in the first place if Andrew sees them first...!
(Bet this one won't either...)
Regrettably, now, under one of the Thought Crime laws that Blair's minions brought in, "two girls [...] dressed in school uniform and [...] about to kiss" could be classed as kiddie porn since they're in school uniform, so it's possible to assume that they're under age.
What this does to St Trinian's films I don't know, but it's probably not good.