
Excellent Article
I think all Reg readers must have spotted the trend, but I had not thought about the long term implications.
21 publicly visible posts • joined 15 Feb 2008
perfection, and I read with great interest the reg's investigations into the somewhat obscured machinery behind the scenes of what is a very influential resource which is not probed adequately by mainstream media......but using this debacle as an excuse to attack the wikimedia foundation is frankly pathetic, and you now have me wondering if other reg reports on wikimedia are born out of biased vitriol.
I'd feel far more comfortable if our author would fully disclose any details about his own relationship with wikimedia?
Had a quick look at an old postcode and it turned out there were a couple in the village next to ours - both of them known...hubby was a BNP candidate in the 2004 elections there. I found a wonderful article about him
*quote*
"In newspaper interviews, Mr Goodchild, claimed that there were other BNP members in the district, but he declined to say how many."
and from the last paragraph:
"Meanwhile the one Asian family in Yoxford was sanguine about the appearance of a far-Right candidate in the local election.
"I don't have a problem with him," said Mr Kanesan. "He seems all right, we just don't talk about politics.""
Class. It is a nice friendly village Yoxford.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1453472/BNP%27s-country-outing-angers-electorate.html
"Btw, disable the feedback box in Chrome. What a great browser."
Isn't it?! I'm no google fanboy (i updated to firefox 3 yesterday and started having problems so decided to try chrome), but I've found it really great. Wonderful clean intuitive interface, no bugs (yet), love the task manager.
I had an idea a while back for a new ultra low cost airline with no security. You sign a lengthy disclaimer, and at the time of departure just barrel up, chuck the baggage on the plane, and off you go. No waiting in line after line, no constantly having to take out and put away documents, no undressing and redressing, no hefty fees to BAA for security theatre or luggage handling/screening, no being cooped up in a departure lounge so you can be sold "tax free" products at 17.5.% higher prices
Let the market decide.
"I think very few women in the sex trade would continue selling sex if they had any other option, i.e., it's not a "lifestyle choice" as you suggest."
I would refer you to my first point:
"There is a seedy element to some sex work - one which I can't help feeling would be significantly reduced if not eliminated by proper regulation - I'd be interested to hear your views on this.
"whose desperation are they exploiting, though? Since the money is taken from men, surely it is exploiting the natural drives of men for the profit of the women and company involved"
I think this is a chicken and egg argument.
"There's absolutely nothing wrong with sex, but there's plenty wrong with "sex work", be it prostitution, exploitation of women, or appearing on a web cam for some dirty old man to w@nk off"
I think you're painting with rather too broad a brush here. There is a seedy element to some sex work - one which I can't help feeling would be significantly reduced if not eliminated by proper regulation - I'd be interested to hear your views on this. But whatever my or your feelings on sex work, many people feel perfectly comfortable performing it, and that being the case who are you or I to stop them?
OK, so the original comment was a bit blokey, (it's going to happen, this *IS* the internet - *AND* a tech site to boot) but regarding the rest - a few years ago whilst at Uni and looking to subsidise my income I was referred for an interview with a sex chatline company (I'm a man).
I suppose if you consider removing your clothes on camera demeaning (which it no doubt is to some people, but also probably not to others) then you'd consider that to be also.
I didn't take the job - I didn't think I'd be very good at it, but I did go to the interview. It looked just like a normal call centre - a load of bored looking people talking into headsets whilst reading newspapers or fiddling with stationary.
There's nothing technically wrong with "terroristic", but it's a perfect example of the current habit of trying to shoehorn buzzwords into official statements in order to justify what might otherwise be unjustified overreactions, which the US (and often UK) authorities and media seem particularly keen on.
eg. "making terroristic threats" vs "making threats"
It's also completely unneccesary, "making terror threats" would suffice perfectly if he actually had, but the subtle addition of "ic"implies he didn't make terror threats, he made terror-like threats. As far as I'm aware *any* threat could be considered terror-like.
Consumers will always prefer a pull market to a push market, and new content delivery methods like the net put people like catchuptv in a position to fulfill the demands of consumers where the media monoliths are too slow, or too unwilling to relax their control. And why should they? unless smaller players like this force their hand. Everybody knows what catchuptv were doing is an inevitablity, and i think it's a great pity they've been stepped on by major players who simply want to buy time to implement there own overblown and overpriced offerings.
Consumers will always prefer a pull market to a push market, suppliers will always prefer the opposite. New content delivery methods like the net put people like catchuptv in a position to fulfil the demands of consumers where the media monoliths are too slow, or too unwilling to relax their control. And why should they? unless smaller players like this force their hand. Everybody knows what catchuptv were doing is an inevitability, and i think it's a great pity they've been stepped on by major players who simply want to buy time to implement there own overblown and overpriced offerings.