
Marmalade powered missiles?
Surely this jam fuelled destruction concept is more in the realm of that bulging bonced bonkers boffin bureau - DARPA?
388 publicly visible posts • joined 4 Mar 2008
If that's the case then the question really needs to be 'Is the seat on the council worth £20bn?'
My own feeling, with admittedly nothing to back it up, is that it is. What else does the UK have that could replace the influence with countries that aren't on the council?
How often is our vote bought at the council and how much is that worth to the UK? Two questions that certainly can't be answered by anyone here but I suspect the answers are 'As often as the Americans want to pay.' and 'Significantly more than £20bn.'
On the basis of that recommendation I'm thinking of giving it try!
On the actual subject in hand. Although this is a pretty daft story, after all I can't believe that even an American judge would do more than laugh this out of court, it does serve to give another example of the downright despicable tactics of an organsiation, sorry cult, that is determined to prevent anyone challenging it.
Thumbs up for the recommendation and the story?
an epic scale fail.
I can't see it now - 'Here's a good idea, let's turn over massive swathes of our rapidly dwindling arable land to produce a range of crops that won't feed anyone.'
So we'll be able to ferry people around but can't feed them?
Come on people. Food for fuel doesn't make sense. I suppose you could argue that if you''re living in a rich country then you really don't need to give a toss about whether there's a food shortage or not as it's not likely to affect you.
Mine's the one with 'Hydrogen Cracker' on the back.
Why the fuck do they have to make them look like circa 1980 casios? Really is that the best they can come up with?
The only reason that this idea always falls flat on it's arse is because it doesn't look cool.
The sad fact is if it's made out of smooth, curved and moulded plastic (not necessarily watch shaped maybe more like a large bracelet), market it to teens, make the UI something that doesn't involve the average joe or joe-etta having to use a pencil sharpener on their fingertips in order to press the right button and you MIGHT be onto something.
It won't actually matter how good it is.
Inaccurate but funny nonetheless.
Looking at the comments by Sean and AC it would seem we've had a minor invasion of Daily Mail readers.
Just so we're not talking about different things here I just want to check that I've got your points correct:
@Sean - Your obviously sarky comment implies that photography by amateurs/hobbyists/tourists etc has no value therefore anybody wanting to take photos must be weird/perverted/up to no good. You really believe that? Seriously?
@AC 03:48 - Your arguments are that people take photographs solely in order to distress others and for their own benefit. Second, that being in public is actually a private activity. Third, that governement surveillance is vastly outweighed by the huge number of snoopers with camera phones just randomly waiting for you to fall down stairs.
1) Partly correct. Of course photographers take pictures for their own benefit, if they're tourists or it's their hobby then why else would they do it? Who are these people that do it to distress and exploit others? Paprazzi? Scroats carrying out a happy slapping? The reasons that photographers take pictures are varied but I'm feeling pretty confident in saying that 'to distress and exploit' is such a small percentage of the total that it barely registers. Obviously you feel that all photography should be banned on that basis. While you're at it lets ban planes because some people use them to do bad things. Or maybe the internet. Or cars. Or sex.
2) Partly correct again - Take a photo of someone leaving a rehab clinic and although they are outside and ostensibly 'in public' that would be an invasion of their privacy. Take a photo of the milling crowds at the recent Christmas market - not really an invasion of privacy is it? The clue is in the word 'public' i.e. not private.
3) Wrong - If you walk from one side to the other of any town in this country I guarantee that the chance you will be caught on CCTV is massively higher than being caught randomly crossing the shot of some amateur photographer. And before you ask - yes I have worked in CCTV control rooms in the past.
As a final point, if a photographer specifically wants to take a picture of you then they should ask you, I agree, but if they're taking a picture of a PUBLIC area you happen to be in are you really saying that they should expect to be physically attacked or outlawed? That's possibly the daftest thing I've heard in while, bar Seans succintly expressed and well reasoned arguments of course.
Just a little word of warning for all those 'NuLab' haters here.
On what evidence do you think that any other government, and by that I mean the Tories as they're the only ones that would get power, would be any less despotic than the current one? The only reason that the current gov are getting all the stick is because the steps they are taking are big ones and they way they are doing it is obvious to anyone with half a brain.
Don't be naive. Every government of whatever persuasion would love to do what Labour are doing. You can be sure that they would just try to do it with less fuss.
It is the nature of the beast and a sign of the times (I'm beginning to sound like a apocalypse conspiracist! :-/ ). As the flow of information through society increases the ability for any government to maintain control of that information (and hence minimise the effect that information has on the citizen) decreases. Ergo the need for greater and more extensive surveillance and control methods.
The addition of a religion (or at least hostile elements of) to serve as a focus for increasing the fear levels and thinly covering the increasingly tight grip of the state on its' people is just a plus.
True freedom has never really existed. True freedom in a society is anarchy and nobody really wants that. However, what little freedom we did have is now being squeezed to death by the imperative that:
'You are a free person able to think and act on your own volition (except where we arbitrarily deem otherwise). We would ask you to sign here to agree to this but your consent has been implied by your existence.'
Black helicopters, what else?
Putting aside the how and why and who's to blame aspects of this incident for a moment, I'd just like to say that we all owe a debt of gratitude to all those that have given, or continue to risk, their lives for the advancement of the human species into space.
Thanks space traveller-type folks.
"...seriously I think most governments would rather have terrorist target a military installation than some crowded marketplace."
Call me an old tin-foil hat wearing cynical paranoid delusionist if you will, but...really? Are you sure?
Civilians are cheap and a few dead ones are an excellent way of keeping the fear levels way up there. All good for the continued creeping imposition of the police state.
If you're already a parent to stupid or too lazy to oversee what your children play then a list like this is extremely unlikely to change that.
Oh dear what am I saying? I can see it now, the first time mom and pop take an interest in what their kid is playing is because it offends Jaysus and Dear Lawd God Almighty.
Quick BURN ALL THE GAMES!
And what are these kids going to do when their misguided parents take away the only outlet for their deeply embedded frustration and rage?
Do you have a 'Gone on a gun rampage' icon?
"Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) " - Are you serious?
Menacing but stirring music - Cue voiceover - "Terrorists travel in cars across our borders everyday. Now, technology has the answer. With radio frequency scanning and automated security checking - you're going nowhere unless you're in whitey (WHTI)."
Re: 'This is occurring. ' - Not sure what your point is with important people and people with money. If you've put in a request that isn't dealt with correctly then appeal, first to the relevant authority and then to the ICO and then to the Information Tribunal. Yes it will take a long time, yes the authority will try and stall but the process is there, it's well established and it's your legal right. Stop whining about it and get writing.
Re: 'Uh, how can I be asked to pay into a pot that then gets divvied up and I have no idea how?' Of course you can find out how. Every public authority is obliged to make their accounts available to the public. That's where you'll find the infrmation you're looking for. Again, it seems you're displaying a limited knowledge of contracts. A contract will not list how monies have been spent. It should detail how monies are to be spent. A significant difference. If you're asking for a contract expecting to get copies of receipts then you're always going to be disappointed.
Re: 'Lasting forever isn't commercially sensitive.' ? What? I feel you've missed my point (again) which was that at some point in the future the public authority is going to have to go out to obtain tenders/bids for the service. It's then that the authority could find that they're having to pay more because there are fewer companies willing to bid for the work. To take your McD's analogy, if the contract specified the ingredients for their secret sauce do you really think they would bid for the service when they expect that the authority they're working for to give that info out to anyone that asks for it? Do you? Really?
Re: 'We aren't putting a gun to their head to apply for a contract.' And so the lesson continues. You're absolutely right we aren't 'putting a gun to their head' (a little over dramatic there IMO) but there are services, works and products that a public authority needs to obtain in order to serve the public. What happens when no-one is willing to supply those? "I'm sorry madam but unfortunately we are no longer able to operate a refuge service for victims of domestic violence because nobody was willing to bid for the work." 'I'm sorry members of the public but we've had to pay a higher price for a poorer service because of the lack of competition in xyz area."
Re:"If the prices raise, then the free market has been proven not to work." So you are a communist then. Rightly or wrongly, the free market exists (and before you get started I'm not going to debate that statement) and public authorities have to operate within it in a way that obtains best value for the public. Yes, I am aware that this doesn't always happen but that's off subject. This is the situation as it stands. Best of a bad job you might say. Deal with it.
I'm trying not to be too harsh but you obviously have a very simplistic idea of how FOIA or corporate procurement in a public authority works. That's not your fault and I won't hold it against you.
To explain.
Re: 'None of the contract is being released.' - If this is occuring then it's a misuse of FOIA and can and should be challenged. The clue is in the title Freedom of INFORMATION Act. Not freedom of documents, freedom of contracts or any other such thing. The guidance is clear - although some information in a contract may be subject to the s.43 exemption a significant portion of it probably won't be and should be released.
Re: 'Now, please tell us how a contract that is already signed and sealed can, if told to the public WHO PAY IT, would result in commercial harm to either party?' - Contracts don't last forever. They also contain more information than 'We will pay this amount for that service product.'. In many cases the amount that a contract is worth, once signed and 'sealed' can be released into the public. However, this isn't the kind of information we're talking about. How many companies can you name that would be happy to give their profit margins, operating costs and methods or the projected values of their contracts to anyone that asked for it? If you get a number any higher than 0 you've made a mistake.
The whole point is - If a company cannot be assured that information which would assist it's competitors will not be made public then they will either not bid for the work or raise their prices in order to cover the potential loss of revenue. Now you tell me - how is that in the public interest?
Re: 'I would say "none". I've already got the contract and the secret sauce would be a way to ensure that you have a monopoly over supplying that result. Well, keep it secret but don't get paid for it.' - Are you a communist? So no company working with a public authority should be allowed to have trade secrets? That's a laughable comment.
Fail.
What a lot of people don't understand a lot of contract information can be released without any problems at all. What the exemption deals with is those areas where release of the information would be likely to harm someones' commercial interests (and that includes the public authorities interests as well).
If you had a particular way of working that no other company had and this was disclosed as part of an FOI just exactly how much harm do you think that would do to your business?
Just shouting 'It's our money!!' a lot is a bit daft. What happens when a local authority can't get anyone to tender for work that needs to be done or the only ones that do are rubbish because other companies don't want their trade secrets out in the open?
As I said earlier, any FOI officer worth their salt will look very hard at whether a particular piece of info will genuinely do harm and can and do override their own managers, directors and the wailing of the company involved if they don't believe that that harm will occur.
If I'm being honest I do quite like the look and yes it 's very Xbox Live focussed which is something I don't mind either. The ability to load games to the HD is the real seller for me though.
Downsides - as per Barry's comment, the ridiculous number of error messages I'm now getting when trying to look at, well pretty much anything on Live. The amount of time I've spent looking at the Xbox equivalent of the sand timer, a lot of things seems to be taken considerably longer than before. And the ridiculous way that having to view my 'Active downloads' involves pressing the shiny button to close my shiny new GUI which opens up crap grey textboxes which I then have to scroll through blade style to get to the Active downloads section. I'll be damned if I can find it through the new interface.
All in all, could be good but it's falling on the side of fail for me. I never really had any problem with the old blade system (and I wasted several minutes trying to make a tune by quickly flicking blades backwards and forwards (managed a passable 'Good King Wencleslas')
Thanks Pete. It's good to know that at a fundamental level 'democracy' can and does work.
I'm currently trogging the streets for 2-3 hours every day getting people to complete their electoral register forms (so they can take part in our own impending circus of fools) and a small compensation is the thought that every person that completes their form is another one that can choose to take part in deciding just how this country is run.
Sometimes it's difficult to get people to see the power they have and that's why PEO Pete's are needed everywhere that democracy is supposed to be.
...although just for a minute obviously, it's good to see (the reincarcation of Jesus), sorry, Bono the Holy devout espouser that everyone should stop burning fossil fuels and give all our money to alleviate African poverty, utilising one of the greenest forms of transport around - the mutli-million quid super yacht (I've not seen the pics so don't bother to correct me if it's actually a mega-yacht or super yacht or mini yacht, I don't give a shit and it is still a fucking $$$ yacht).
I'm sure that the carbon saving more than sets off against rest of his fucking monumetal transport needs.
P.S. I tried to search for what transport he actually does use/own but there's nothing, NOTHING. I say conspiracy. No reason, I just do.
Black helicopter because I bet he fucking owns two.