Brains
"most people with a bit of brains will do anything to get out of jury service"
Not sure I'd want my fate to be in the hands of a bunch of self-serving arseholes like that, however clever they might be.
353 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Mar 2007
I think the CofE is ripe for a takeover - it's been a bit of a 'lite' religion in a lot of parts for a while and congregations are falling.
A few CofE priests saying
"You know what? It doesn't matter if you really believe in gods, it's still a good idea to meet up once a week, have a chat about what's going on, reassure ourselves that it's not all bad and check that none of the old people has carked it while we've been at work."
would push things along nicely and if you could increase bums on pews then the higher-ups might think there was something in it.
There's a pleasant little church up my way not too far from the Nag's Head - could pick up a pint or two and a packet of salt and vinegar on the way past (or if they want to fund the events with an exclusive wine and biscuit sales setup I'd not complain).
A bit of a community update with no hymns wouldn't take too long, could carry on any discussions in the pub after.
"unable to respect other people's opinions"
I am utterly unable to respect these people's opinions.
Respect their right to hold and express these opinions, okay, the alternative is worse, but appear to condone these opinions in any way, such as not being rude about them? No. In my opinion that's not the right way to go about things.
I want it to be clear I think they are wrong and not worth listening to.
There's nothing particularly 'denier'-ish about this article.
The only real link to AGW (and anyone that far into the jargon might want to consider how zealous they themselves appear) is that if this prediction is correct then it might be a good thing if man made global warming was real.
I'm meek enough that I prefer to be legit and I am not skint so at the moment I don't take for free things I can buy.
But they do seem to offer me the convenience of torrenting huge swathes of music and legitimising it all at a stroke for less than the cost of half a dozen CDs.
You might be sniffy about the AAC format but I doubt it'd matter all that much for me - I'm either listening out and about where there's plenty of ambient noise or through a far-from top end Yamaha receiver and a pair of Mission bookshelfs so I reckon it'll probably do - and presumably there's nothing to stop a similar service launching using a superior format.
I won't be doing this but I almost feel stupid for not taking advantage and cutting my annual music spend to a tiny fraction of its current amount.
It's clearly better for the industry than someone pirating and never paying anything at all but if I decided to switch from buying the few hundred quid a year of CD and vinyl that I do currently and went down this Persil Pirate route they'd lose out.
And seeing as the real freetards will resent even this small outlay it might more likely be people like me who prefer to be more or less legit who would be attracted to this sort of service.
Was my first thought.
Otherwise it seems like an odd move with Twitter being less used than other social media (although perhaps there's a strong Twitter / iOS correlation).
What are the potential benefits for Apple in buying or strongly linking themselves to Twitter? More ways to push the networks into the background?
It's not just made public though, it is also sold - or so this NDA implies.
The original holder of then information then loses the value of that sale as once revealed the information has no further value.
That pretty much makes it a chose in action and makes taking it without the consent of the owner a candidate for being classed as theft.
You'd also need something that generated tales of woe and triumph for these soft stars to get the grannies emotionally involved enough come present buying time that they could remember what they'd been told to buy.
Some kind of virtual rehab for them to head to when they can't generate publicity any other way would probably also help.
Sorry - mine was considerably less, didn't realise the price had risen.
http://shop.orange.co.uk/mobile-phones/san-francisco-from-orange-in-grey
Phone itself is £94.99 at present but out of stock (online - I haven't checked any shops) and with the mandatory top up being £20 now even if you could buy it you'd be right to suggest it didn't fit this round-up unless perhaps you could bring along a public sector payslip to get Orange's generous discount.
A new Harry Potter book would be trouble but no one has passed off their non-Apple phone as an iPhone, they've just made a device which uses the well established features of the genre.
I don't see Rowling successfully suing someone who writes a book about a young boy in somewhat undesirable surroundings who, it turns out, is not only special but is in fact very important to some chain of events of major significance.
She'd certainly be a dreadful hypocrite if she did.
Considering it's really just a simple tool for implementing defined standards it's mad that the nearest we've had to a standard browser was the dog's dinner that was IE6*.
A rock-solid, undeniable standard would benefit almost everyone from the consumer up and would probably cost less for the organisations that have the power to make it happen than the effort currently expended on ensuring the current competing browsers are all adequately supported.
--
*That is to say there was a period during which if you made something for general comsumption that was *not* happy in IE6 you were an idiot but if you made something that was *only* happy in IE6 you'd almost certainly get away with it.
Do people actually not want DAB or is it just that people in areas with poor reception don't think it's any use?
For me it's a tremendous improvement over AM/FM - probably 80% of my media consumption is DAB radio (although the admongers would be less keen to know that 99% of that is advert-free BBC).
If I couldn't have it, I'd certainly miss it; frankly I'd probably even pay for it.
"As for the INES nuclear incident scale and Fukushima's new 7 rating – the highest possible – you could draw various lessons from that.
But the only rational conclusion to draw is that an industry which can have an accident at the extreme top of its possible internationally agreed accident scale without killing a single person is already so safe that it probably deserves to relax its costly precautions quite a lot"
This may be true but it's not a conclusion you can draw at all yet (as you half acknowledge with your 'probably) and it certainly isn't the *only* conclusion that can be drawn - that the rating system is flawed being one other.
We may be able to provide nuclear power more cheaply with relaxed safety regulation but we've not established this for certain yet.
This sort of jumping to hoped-for conclusions together with the sneering tone does not result in articles which give me a lot of hope that the argument will be swung in the right direction for the right reasons.
Is there any chance of a bland, unsensationalist Reg article by an expert plainly summarising the facts?
Average Joe Public is precisely the market that is not being talked about here.
It is not only tech heads that care about lock-in.
A business customer that might be buying hundreds or thousands of units is not going to go for something they don't have the ability to configure centrally and customise to suit their needs.
In that market Apple might find they lose out to Google and partners, and Microsoft.
And that's potentially a very large market indeed with the knock on problem for Apple that if work has provided you with a tablet device, you're less likely to go and spend your own money on another one.
It may be that Apple's happy to ignore this sort of customer - they don't sell a great number of their PCs into businesses either and have never had much of a presence in the server market either without suffering too much as a result - but that doesn't make all the claims reported in this article inaccurate.
So in the absence of anything in the manual they turn immediately to the press and decide what to do based on how much journalists seem to be encouraging people to panic?
If they haven't run disaster drill they should have. If they come to the last page of the manual and have no idea what to do they should have.
And I rather suspect they do - the idea that they let media hype pressure them into making unsafe decisions is absurd. If they have then they are idiots.
"the media concentrate on nuclear radiation from which no-one has died - and is unlikely to."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12860842 (as suggested by an earlier poster)
"All energy generation entails risk, but nuclear is the least polluting, most dependable source."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/8384196/The-world-shouldnt-panic-about-Japans-nuclear-problems.html
"The problems in Japan "could never have been a Chernobyl - that could not have happened," "
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/29/nuclear-power-safe-sir-david-king
Yes, I googled. And yes, an online copy 'seems' to be the first result but as you will no doubt have seen, being the thorough sort of person you so clearly are, that's just the (rather impressive) front page. If the text content is available it would appear to be behind a paywall and I am too much of a freetard to take that route.