"Everyone remembers what happened to the Comet..."
Yes, they do, and other aircraft manufacturers have privately admitted that, had the Comet not suffered the problems it did, those problems would most likely have occurred in their aircraft.
6899 publicly visible posts • joined 19 Jan 2007
@Psyx - Have a look at the Tweets posted here: http://tompride.wordpress.com/2014/01/06/threats-of-death-and-violence-after-channel-4-programme-benefits-street/comment-page-3/
Now they may not be *personally* addressing the people there, but this isn't a joke about blowing up an airport either.
Really? I have an *extremely* high index (-10 right, -11 left!) yet I have no trouble at night using RGP lenses.
I've considered laser treatment etc, but since nobody can promise me that it would make my eyesight perfect, I'll stick to the contacts.
"However, these provisions could see the control editors have over how and where they appear in their print publications or online platforms being taken away from them."
So we might see an end to them printing a story with huge lurid front page headlines, then, when it's shown to be false, publishing a correction in a tiny font at the bottom of page 27...
Alas the on/off switch on my FX-81 died a long while ago, but I still have an FX-350 by my side here and an FX-570 in the other room which are kept working by dint of leaving the power switch "on" and just using the AC button to switch it on and letting the auto time-out to switch it off.
These filters will never be used improperly, will they...?
"mobile operator O2 has blocked a huge range of sites through its “Parental Controls” settings. If their parents have chosen this option, children using O2 phones will be unable to access almost all of the internet: police websites, the NHS, ChildLine, the NSPCC, the Samaritans, many schools and even the main government website, GOV.UK.[...] And sites like ChildLine and the Samaritans are there precisely to provide support to children in crisis who may have nowhere else to turn. [...] Children can have burgers marketed to them but they can’t get help if they’re being neglected or abused."
http://adrianshort.org/2013/12/22/some-websites-should-be-unblockable/
Sites like this one which give excellent advice to parents on how to teach children about the importance of consent and respect for others will also be blocked:
http://goodmenproject.com/families/the-healthy-sex-talk-teaching-kids-consent-ages-1-21/
Bravo, Dave, sites that don't teach girls how not to be raped, but aim to teach boys *not* to rape will no doubt be censored by the Great Firewall of Britain because we're "thinking of the chidren"...!
... that a site like the following (which gives excellent advice to parents and children about the importance of consent) will get blocked...?
http://goodmenproject.com/families/the-healthy-sex-talk-teaching-kids-consent-ages-1-21/
This isn't just "don't get raped", it's "don't rape", full stop. Learn that "no" means "NO" and respect the rights of others. But it's about (gasp!) sex and we can't have impressionable minds seeing that sort of thing!!
> Can anyone point to a definitive study that shows harm being done?
No, because there isn't one. There's lots of anecdotal claims, but they're generally based on the idea that "they saw porn therefore they did XYZ" and ignoring any other influences that may have been around.
On the flip-side, however, is the work of, for example, Professor Milton Diamond PhD of the University of Hawai'i who studied the effects of the increased availability of porn in Japan and America and concluded:
" It is certainly clear from the data reviewed, and the new data and analysis presented, that a massive increase in available pornography in Japan, the United States and elsewhere has been correlated with a dramatic decrease in sexual crime"
http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-effects-of-pornography.html
Unfortunately that didn't stop the last government introducing their Thought Crime "Extreme Pornography" legislation, nor, I have little doubt, regrettably, will it stop David Cameron from introducing a law making possession of videos of "consenting non-consensual" porn (ie acted out scenes of "rape" by consenting adults) a criminal offence as well.
You can (for whatever good it will do) sign a petition to object to this here: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/58255
Great, provided that the only text alert allowed is a silent-mode vibration.
I once had the misfortune to be in the Quiet Coach of a train with some idiot who, fine, wasn't *talking* on his phone, but his text alert was the Tarzan yell. After him getting about a dozen texts in five minutes I asked him politely to turn the bloody sound off to which he replied "Oh, sorry, I didn't know it was bothering anyone..."
> "Surely we all own the copyright to our faces...?"
Nope, anyone can take your photograph in a public place and even re-use it there's nothing you can do about it. The only thing that they can't (or shouldn't) do is to post something defamatory in relation to the picture because that's libel, but even then you'd have to sue them to get redress.
> "Hotel rooms usually include a safe, keeping the laptop (if it will fit) or the hard drive in there is better than carrying it around with you. For that matter, the hotel itself usually has a very secure safe"
Both of which are entirely vulnerable to corrupt staff since the room safe has a built in "back door" security code to unlock it and the hotel safe can be opened by whoever is duty manager at the time .
As such, all they give is a false sense of security.