Re: Natural selection at it's finest.
Classic! Isn't prison rape just a hilarious joke?
419 posts • joined 9 Mar 2011
Anything else available from Microsoft maybe... But that doesn't say much for Windows 95.
The same capability had been available for UNIX systems for quite some time. And had mostly left it as the menu system is a rather stilted interface.
The 'Start' menu is literally a Microsoft invention, right down to the (lamentable and inevitable) patents, so I don't see how UNIX had had it for quite some time.
If you mean menus in general, what has replaced them since for mouse & cursor? Microsoft's own 'Ribbon'?
If you meant that a shell is better than the GUI, that's indefensible for the vast majority of users, but the command line was in Windows 95, too, of course.
Really, what you say makes no sense at all unless you take the attitude that everything from Microsoft is either crap or already invented. They've come out with plenty of crap & thievery without making some more up.
The GUI of '95 was good. The rest of it was garbage compared to their own NT3.5 and less stable than a properly installed WFWG3.11
Adding a new GUI, plug & play, an actual 32-bit API and pre-emptive multi-tasking while still maintaining backwards compatibility with all the 16-bit applications and the crappy hardware they ran on was a minor coding miracle. Check out some of Raymond Chen's columns for a bit of insight into what it took.
Of course Win95 was 'garbage' compared to NT - NT was a clean-sheet design that didn't have to deal with the compromises of 15 years of DOS. Windows 95 did and was still massively successful because of that work done to keep backwards-compatibility.
What was a "properly installed WFWG3.11"? One that didn't crash because it didn't run anything but Minesweeper?
Crooked ones: Clinton Family Foundation (enough said).
No, not enough said. Please provide evidence for your assertion that the Clinton Foundation is "crooked".
• Overall Score & Rating 94.74
• Financial 97.50
• Accountability & Transparency 93.00
In comparison, the Red Cross gets an overall score of 85.01.
It was flaky in West London this morning. Some sites - e.g. BBC, wherever Logitech SqueezeBoxes point to - wouldn't resolve at all - while others were unaffected. If I hadn't turned on the radio and also tried to check the weather forecast, I wouldn't have known it was happening.
Their 'Service Status' site was misleading as it reported nothing except routine maintenance this morning, so they lose respect for fibbing.
That preface before the broadcast of 'Ida' is loathsome, but I think it is due less to lying than it is to the nationalist bent of the Kaczynski government and their manipulation of the state broadcasters.
I have some sympathy for Poles feeling prickly about how they are represented - 60 years of hearing "Polish death camps" in publications that really ought to know better would infuriate me, too. But reacting as if every gentile Pole behaved unquestionably behaviour is absurd and diminishes the vast majority who were brave and did not collaborate with the Nazis, let alone participate in the Holocaust.
That said, Poles are free to have these discussions. Under Putin, Russians aren't.
That automated truck will be able to communicate with the automated vehicles around it, to let them know what it's planning on doing and take away the surprise.
Trump was calling for the Russians to supply evidence of Hillary's crimes.
What crimes? It's always smoke and never fire from the Clinton-haters.
Forget any claims of false equivalence, too; Trump is a threat to democracy and the world. Clinton isn't.
"So any company producing goods in the UK may start looking to relocate - it won't be a sudden thing but it will certainly start weighting decisions on where companies invest in the future."
Anyone want to hazard a guess about how long it will take Airbus (EADS) to decide that manufacturing wings in Wales and then flying them to Southern France is rather more hassle than simply manufacturing them in Southern France? It won't be the toughest sell to get a few key people to swap Flintshire for le Midi.
"Anyone know who can initiate article 50?"
Here it is:
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention.
It's vague, but given there's been a referendum I'd imagine the PM in his role as "head of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom" could simply send a letter. Passing a bill or a motion might be the way they actually do it.
I'd expect that if the remaining EU members feel they're getting jerked around with the UK govt. delaying then they might come up with a creative interpretation of "notify" and get the ball rolling.
Finally, if we do vote to leave, this will split up the UK. Scotland will want another referendum, possibly Wales as well
Not to mention Northern Ireland - it'd be a case of ripping out the stiches of an unhealed wound.
Border controls would have to be reintroduced (or else the whole line about protecting the UK's borders would be meaningless); I can't imagine the local constabulary or the British Army being too keen on handling that horrible mess again.
My local shopping centre was bombed by the Real IRA only 15 years ago. It'd be nice if the peace process wasn't destabilised.
I think you will find that roaming charges are basically socialist.
Wait, you're seriously suggesting that the mobile operators offer PAYG service out of the goodness of their hearts and not for profit?
The 'capitalism' answer was a bit smart-alecky but still on the money - the operators will charge whatever they can get away with it. That is unfettered capitalism in action. It doesn't matter if one thinks it's good or bad, it's a fact.
More worrying is how the remain campaign official economic reports all seem to support leaving as fixing the housing market, better economic growth, bank of england interest rate rise (something we have all been waiting for) and while assuming awful trade policies as we currently have.
You are clearly confused. The Remain campaign - and 10 Nobel Prize winning economists - are all predicting a drop in GDP if the vote is to leave. If Leave is chosen then the trade policies will only remain the same if the UK govt. accept freedom of movement, which would make no sense given that that is the source of most of the complaints. No freedom of movement, no right of access to the common market. Lower house prices would be good, but the current govt. could do that just fine by introducing, say, land-taxes.
As for Turkey joining the EU: not in the foreseeable future and perhaps never if Imam Erdogan continues on his path. They meet exactly 1 of the 35 criteria and Cyprus and Greece are not afraid to use their vetos.
Phone operators have a target of money they want to make from their customers. They'll find a way, if one door is closed another will be nudged open.
Yeah, but it would be nice if that way is making something so awesome we all say "take my money, please!" rather than just extortion.
They are amongst the worst offenders for avoiding paying any taxes.
Thanks, a good answer to a genuine question. In that respect they're very similar to Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Starbucks etc. I'm all up for taxing them properly and making the field as even as possible.
That said, it's hard not be sardonic about Black Cab drivers being used as an example of paying taxes :)
Out of curiousity, what subsidy do Uber get that other cab operators don't?
Uber certainly have their share of shady practises, but taxis in France are well overdue for a shakeup. Every over-blown cliché about the French work habits - strikes, laziness, arrogance, extortion, unreliability, etc. - actually do apply to them.
I'm reading this thread on those Windows Phones we all have now.
In fact, once it is offshore the horse has bolted, there is bugger all you can do short of blanket taxing 40% any financial transaction coming from Panama, Virgin Islands, etc.
Sounds like a solid idea to me!
I miss the good old days when personal culpability was the rage and if you acted the idiot and got hurt it was your fault.
When the 'hurt' is abstract then it's easy to be a bit heartless, but see it up close and it's hard to keep that attitude. An uncle of mine was squashed by a shipping container while working at a port; it was partially his fault and partially the port-operator's, but the death was entirely his.
One of my lecturers at uni showed the class a series of pictures of industrial accidents - the one that sticks was the girl with a pony-tail who was scalped when her hair was caught up in the engine of a go-kart - and the point was clear: health and safety laws are there for very, very good reasons.
"God Mode"? You mean, the Control Panel view that lists the various helpers and utilities?
Next you'll be getting all breathless telling us how you hacked into Google using tracert.
"it is slow and you worry for the fuckers"
It's kind of you to worry about people on bicycles, AKA mums, dads, friends, colleagues, children and other assorted fuckers.
The fact is that traffic here in London moves no faster than horse-drawn carriages did a century ago; in fact, a running chicken out-paces drivers and bicycles certainly do as well.
You may feel that cyclists are holding you up, but they aren't, other drivers going nowhere fast in their cars are.
As Chris Boardman says, cycling is just a means to an end: space (and time) efficient, reliable, cheap and healthy urban transportation. It should be supported because it's the best way to achieve this goal. You may disagree, but if you do, what is your alternative plan?
Aberdeen City Council has cut £900k from the sport and elderly care budgets, but found a million to put in a cycle lane no-one will use.
No-one? The count of cyclists in Aberdeen was up 23% in 2014; decent cycling infrastructure results in more cycling, which means less pollution, fewer road deaths, and a healthier (and wealthier) population.
It's beyond ironic to bitch about cycling on an article about potholes when road damage caused by a vehicle is proportional to the the fourth-power of the vehicle axle weight.
One thing's also not noted: the PRICE ... in terms of mass market adoption, they're going to have to do something about the price first
Not really, since the value of HDDs only applies when users want and use huge drives. If they're satisifed with 256GB it's already cheaper to buy the SSD; the more that production shifts to SSDs, even the wee ones, the harder it is for HDDs to maintain economies of scale.
Nearly all jet passenger panes these days look so similar and boring, thank heavens for the A380.
The A380 has all the elegance of a beluga whale. It's certainly nice to fly on and is probably the most practical design possible, but no charm at all.
And the rabbits, wallabies, possums etc are out of hand so I'm glad I'm moving into town later this year.
The wallabies really are getting out of hand if they're ravaging sheep...
If Australian gun laws prohibit gun-owners from lending out firearms to unlicensed people, then it's hard to see a problem with that. If you want a gun, get a gun license.
Laws prohibiting shooting around dwellings are also quite sensible. Most people would prefer that there are no bullets flying anywhere near their house and family. Possums and rabbits are easy to trap and as for wallabies, they're native and cute, so let them be.
In any case you're setting up a straw man arguing about farmers when farmers would be completely unaffected by a prohibition on Glocks, AR-15s and pump-action shotguns.
Australia implemented gun control after Port Arthur and there hasn't been another massacre since; who would want to go back to the slaughter that the US experiences. Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, Columbine High - none could have happened in Australia, thankfully, and hopefully one day they won't repeat in the US.
No, people I mean.
That's a really weak counter-point you've made. Guns have a place as a tool on farms, but show me a farmer who would shoot a sheep rather than cut its throat and I'll show you a gun-nut.
Hunting and pest-control are legitimate uses for guns; neither requires a Glock, nor an AR-15, nor a pump-action shotgun. All of those are for killing people.
I guess it boils down to whether you are happy to accept a higher chance of being shot in exchange for the freedom to own a gun
When gun-nuts talk about their rights, I always wonder why they ignore the right to not get shot.
NOx is only a problem when ... when idling ... during normal driving they wouldn't encounter the situation where the cheating was required
In what way is idling not part of normal driving? In the city, that's what cars are doing much of the time.
Imposing standardised tests is rather more useful than non-standardised tests; at least with standards, VW knows what cheating is 'required'. Other manufacturers might attempt to actually meet standards because people's health is important.
If true by some law of physics then all manufacturers will be equally affected.
This is the only flaw in your otherwise spot-on post; some manufacturers tried different ways of meeting the regulations, especially by selling petrol-engined cars and/or hybrid transmissions.
This is perhaps the fundamental problem: European manufacturers have committed hugely to a technology - diesels - that just can't meet the necessary standards. Saying 'tough luck' to pedestrians getting asthma and heart-disease isn't acceptable when there are superior alternative technologies in use right now.
They're right up shit creek with regulations now in the public eye, thanks to this scandal, they'll have an awful lot of trouble getting out.
Maybe, but the more improtant (political) point is that its 85,000 cars that aren't from good ole USofA manufacturers
About half of US auto sales are from imports and VW even have a factory in Tennessee, so nationalism doesn't seem a likely cause. The simplest explanation is that VW tried to sell an unsuitable product - diesel-engined small vehicles - and cheated so egregiously they had to be prosecuted.
On the other hand, German civil servants have done there damnedest to fudge EU standards so that their national champions can keep selling smoke-boxes, "calling for the tests to be conducted on sloping downhill tracks, and for allowing manufacturers to declare a final CO2 value 4% lower than the one measured"
Regarding the air-quality vs. CO2 trade-off; thinking locally it's understandable to prioritise the air-quality, although ideally both could be helped by promoting electric vehicles and built-environments suited to walking & cycling.
Do you mean TCO
Yes, because manufacturing is included in the price and installation and removal is not expensive and for small installations may even be 'free' if part of the roof for a new build.
Location is of course important. Here's a headline from Texas: A Texas Utility Offers a Nighttime Special: Free Electricity. It's for wind-generated power.
I'd rather take my chances with climate change. It might or might not kill me. Lack of electricity or any other energy I can afford definitely would.
It's always astonishing that people can decide when it suits them that capitalism will selectively fail. Right now you can buy solar panels at a cost that makes them supply energy at a price more or less equivalent to fossil-fuel power stations.
Yet somehow if fossil-fuels are priced to include their externalities, alternative power sources will neither be developed nor grown, despite the fact that they already exist and are being used right now.
'Greens' have encouraged fuel economy in cars - do you see the complete absence of cars or simply more efficient ones?
You can import food, even if it's 'too hot' to grow food
Only if you have something to pay for it with, which will be rather a problem when the petroleum runs out or becomes uneconomic, first.
The population of the UAE is 10 million, but only 1.4 million of them are citizens. Egypt, on the other hand, already has 82 million citizens and is a hell of a lot poorer.
The effects of climate change on these poor countries that are also utterly corrupt will be catastrophic.
You're certainly right that with industrial monocultures, we're basically eating oil, but there are alternative methods of production that while more labour-intensive are still productive and certainly more sustainable.
Michael Pollan (he of "eat food, mostly plants, not too much" fame) has written a lot on this with Polyface Farm the best known example.
For all its horror, the casualties of WWII were 'only' 3% of the global population; going from the forecast 9 billion down to 2 would be beyond horrific and hopefully not likely.
You are soon looking forward to a series of wars
It's quite ironic that the US military - not known for liberal tendencies - is forecasting and preparing for these situations as an outcome of AGW, while all of the supposedly pro-military Republican candidates for president flatly deny the existence of AGW.
It's going to be hellish in the worst-affected countries. Yemen is already a disaster heading for a catastrophe.
My other half will easily get 65+MPG out of my car whilst i struggle to get in the 40's.
Speaking heuristically, it might be because you drive like a selfish prick and your other half doesn't.
Or do you only drive when the boat is towed?
The proper perspective is that VW lied and cheated and people have died as a result. Not even VW customers, but people who had no choice but to breathe the pollution of VW vehicles.
Everyone knows about externalities, right?
The technology is already available - and in use - for instant roadside testing of emissions. It combines with license plate recognition (and therefore car make, model & year) to give real-world statistics.
This offers a simple solution: manufacturers vouch for their emissions levels and if they aren't met in real-world sampling then they pay a whopping fine per vehicle.
It would also have the benefit of catching owners who re-program the ECU, modify the exhaust etc.
7 downvotes? There are that many people who prefer to breathe dirty air and want to keep it that way?
VW has met the letter of the law
VW has publicly admitted cheating.
the climate change/eco scam is a multi billion $/£/€ business
had the Australian PM removed
So this is all part of the Anti-Abott-pro-Obama-space-lizard conspiracy? You might want to step away from the screen and experience the real world - you'll find it surprisingly different to what you think.
"However, that's not a reason to jail him, and what this article is about is criminal liability (if any)."
In Common Law countries there's the concept of Vicarious Liability, which could make him subject to prosecution.
I don't buy that he was unaware. Breaking into the US market was strategic for VW and they attempted it by mass-marketing diesels, unlike any other manufacturer. Only wilful ignorance could explain Winterkorn - a well known control freak - failing to ask his staff how they were going to achieve this miracle.
As the EU likewise did to Intel & Microsoft (and deservedly then, too!)
Hopefully, any such fine levied will hurt VW enough to discourage such practices and cause some high-level heads to roll.
"people don't want crap cars"
Not a problem, because there basically aren't any crap cars these days. Here are the best sellers from 2014, any of which would seemed magically good 30 years ago.
Thus this sort of "cheating" is bound to happen over and over till reality is restored.
The reality is that this is cheating: after being presented with evidence of its wrongdoing, Volkswagen admitted that the cars contained defeat devices.
NOx and diesel particulates cause tens of thousands of premature deaths each year in the UK. This kind of cheating shouldn't attract just fines but criminal prosecutions of those who made the decision to cheat; they've literally taken innocent lives.
'97% of climate scientists' is a blatant lie. Look it up.
It probably isn't worth wasting time on ACs who are full of rubbish (there's just too many) but here you go, from NASA:
Among abstracts that expressed a position on AGW [Anthropogenic, or human-cause, Global Warming], 97.1% endorsed the scientific consensus. Among scientists who expressed a position on AGW in their abstract, 98.4% endorsed the consensus.”
97% of god botherers believe in a deity. I still wont take their word for it no matter how delusional them and their followers call me
Scientists are the exact opposite of your 'god-botherers'. People who ignore all the evidence - and the agreement of the experts - are the deluded ones.
Here are some coherent reasons to oppose measures to prevent AGW:
* I don't want to
* It's a hard problem
* I won't be around for the effects of AGW
* My income depends on not trying to prevent AGW
All of these are selfish, but at least honest.
The extreme cults of absolute denier and absolute warmist both look like nuts but it is the warmist cult that is abusing our lives to appease their beliefs. I dont know anyone on the fence who is happy about that
This is the equivalent of the old saw "flat-earthers vs. scientists; opinions about the shape of the earth differ". 97% of climate scientists support the theory of AGW. It isn't cultish to accept the opinion of the overwhelming majority of experts, it's sensible; pretending otherwise is delusional.