Posts by wolfetone

Re: I worry about firms who are still naively waiting for a restore

"I pay them a lot of money (yes, it's a fee-paying school and yes it's possible in this industry to earn enough for that)"

Can you be my daddy? I need an Xbox.

Re: Only 10%?

"The intention is that it's used purely as a relative comparator, not an absolute, so that you know that a car with an official consumption figure of 70 mpg will be more efficient than one with a 60 mpg figure, and not that either will actually deliver the quoted consumption figure"

But it's still a useless comparison. You have a car that the MPG is lied about compared to a car that has MPG that you'll never get. So you may as well spit up in to the air and see where it lands because you simply can't make any sort of decision on it.

Official MPG is a useless yardstick at the moment, regardless of lies or truth.

"Is that a thing?"

Everything is a thing. Just go on one of the reputable pornography sites and see all the weird and wonderful perversions people have.

My own genre, plasticine porn, has yet to gain popularity though.

Re: The Cloud...

Plenty of companies on Twitter offering to host the websites of victims' on their "rock solid cloud" hosting.

It's all about the money, money, money.

Re: Too little, too late.

"Horse, meet stable door. Stable door, meet horse."

I think the problem here is that the Horse never met the Stable door. If it did, none of this would have happened.

Re: I am a bit worried

The Daily Fail are a right wing newspaper. So what will happen is that they will make you pay for Yahoo. It'll be cheap at first, then get more expensive while the service gets worse. To fix it, they will raise the price of the service But the service gets worse, more people leave, the Daily Fail loses money. They then say they're going bankrupt and ask the Government to help. The Government steps in, rescues the service, and over time stabilises it. At which point the Government sell it at a loss to The Daily Mirror.

Re: So the good news is....

"The good news being it cures cancer and the bad news that massive numbers of people have started doing X, which causes cancer?"

But Yahoo! causes cancer. So why would the Daily Fail want to get cancer? Unless, of course, it's actually the Daily Fail that gives you cancer but Yahoo cures it?

We won't know until it turns up on the sidebar of shame.

Re: Serious question for Judge John M. Gerrard ...

Well in that case Schrodingers cat must be dead in the box then?

But what does it matter to you what I believe in? I also believe Panda's are pointless and should be left to go extinct.

To be honest I believe there is a grain of truth in the bible, that some of what happened did happen. Those events aren't confined to the Bible, it can be found in lots of other books like the Quran and the Tora. But at the same time the Bible and other books have been bastardised over time to suit the needs and wants of the religion to gain more followers. The same way Coca Cola use a sweaty muscular man mowing a lawn to sell Diet Coke to females. You have a product to sell, you do what you have to do to make it popular with the public.

But there is this belief, misguided belief, that humans are these bloody incredible people who are so so so smart that we can't possibly be outsmarted. We have been around for feck all time really, yet we're so confident we know it all. I think in the 1500's a man was burned at the stake in England for saying the Earth wasn't at the centre of the universe. That was a popular decision, because the humans around him knew best. Right now it's popular to believe that the countries on a map are all to scale with each other, when in fact Africa is drawn smaller than it really is to stop all the White people shitting themselves about it. (Look it up, it's interesting).

And this whole "no buttsex and no equal rights", that's not a religious thing! That's humans, yet again thinking they know best. In Roman times, even in Egyptian times, it wasn't alien to have two men get it on with each other. But they both had religion at the same time? Gay marriage is legalised now, but there are plenty of Catholics who think its wrong, and there are plenty of Atheists who think it's wrong. There are still Catholics (myself included) who think it's alright for a Gay couple to marry, like wise (I'd hope) you being Atheist would also think it's fine. In the Church of England there are Gay bishops and vicars, in the church! Openly Gay bishops and vicars, and - here's a shocking revelation - there are women vicars! Up until 1700/1800's Priests could also marry in the Catholic church. So to blame religion for the infringement on the rights of homosexuals and women is misplaced.

It isn't God writing the Bible, it's the humans running the show here on Earth who are dictating what we do and don't do. It's the same with Islamic extremists, they say they have read the Quran and that it says all non-muslims must die. They get around this by quoting lines of the Quran, out of context. But the people they preach it to lap it up for one reason or another. The Quran, like the Bible, is a book made up of smaller books and like every other religion violence, hate, all the nasty things just aren't there.

We all know about the 10 commandments, one of them being "Thou Shalt Not Steal". Well I think that's a given isn't it? That's not too bad.

"Thou Shalt Not Murder" is also a good thing. But it gets in the way when you need to get some oil out of a middle eastern country. But if you spin the reasons why you need to go to war - like terrorism - then it isn't murder. It's self defence. Sweet! But that's society moving the goal posts. Just because someone dies in the theatre of war doesn't mean it's not murder. Murder is murder regardless of the circumstance. But that's society's view. Society thinks it's fine to go to war, they don't want to think about the soldiers on the other side being killed, or the kids being blown up. If that happened outside of wartime it'd be Murder. But Society says "If you go to War it isn't murder. More of the opposition killed the better!". Religious texts are simple about it though. You kill someone, it's murder. They don't give caveats.

This is an argument that's regularly had, and I've had it with Atheists, Muslims, Rastafarians etc. My girlfriends Grandad whos 76 has been Atheist all his life - which is a big deal considering what the UK was like in the 50's - and he knows it's human beings who make life shit for everyone else. Religion is the excuse. If you removed religion from the table, what would the excuses be for actions people or countries took?

Because of the human condition, if everyone was like you and Atheist, wars would still go on. People would still be raped. Women would still be second class citizens.

Society is the problem.

Re: Serious question for Judge John M. Gerrard ...

Simple answer to this: Prove it.

You can no more disprove the existence of any sort of God than I can prove the existence of one.

The only way we'll both find out whether one exists or not will be when we die. At that point I'm not entirely sure I'll be able to comment on this thread to see you comment "I TOLD YOU" or whether I will be able to write "Where abouts are you in heaven? Let's have a coffee".

That comment rocked my world I have to say.