Not only was the gear not as clean as it should be, the CIA and BND (German CIA if you like) Legally bought the company!!. The supposedly neutral Swiss crypto company was owned by the the CIA.
44 publicly visible posts • joined 4 Mar 2011
I think you are confusing what you believe with what is actually real (see father for a graphic explanation):
1)Banana law ( (EC) No. 2257/94) does not ban bendy bananas only stops shops being able to class them as "premium" and charging accordingly.
2)The water and dehydration issue: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.1982 This is not a ban rather a decision that water seller cannot quote the reduction of a "disease risk" under Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 since dehydration is not a disease rather a condition. Consequently "regular consumption of water" will not reduce the chances of becoming dehydrated , since a) define regular (daily? what amount?) b) dehydration is a symptom caused by other factors such as environment, what else you have indigested etc. Would a bottle of water stop dehydration if you spent the daya in a desert or a night drinking 2 bottles of whiskey. The answer is no.
3)Diabetes and driving. This was a regulation across Europe of things already being done in the member states and only stopped those who had dibilitating attacks in previous 12 months form driving. Similar to the ban on epileptics. This was not on all diabetices, and in some cases diabetics who were banned from driving (such as diabetics wanting to drive an HGV) could now get licenses (according to DiabetesUK.org) if their doctors would sign of on the type of diabetes and the last attack.
Please don't read a headline in the Telegraph and believe it is the whole story. There are intelligent people working in the EU who create rules only when they are asked by the member states.
Its not that difficult, 2002 rules said that you could have an .eu domain if the legal person asking for it :
(a) a natural person who is a resident of a Member State;
(b) an undertaking that is established in the Union; or
(c) an organisation that is established in the Union, without prejudice to the application of national law.
This has changed to allow:
(i) a Union citizen, independently of their place of residence;
(ii) a natural person who is not a Union citizen and who is a resident of a Member State;
(iii) an undertaking that is established in the Union; or
(iv) an organisation that is established in the Union, without prejudice to the application of national law.
So basically, they have extended it so that you can have one even if you don't live in EU, as long as you are a citizen, with a 2-month grace period to clear up any missing information. Which is quite nice of them really, given that it the Brits that are being arsy and leaving.
BTW, the residence over citizenship principle was used during the referendum when many non-Brits who lived in the UK could vote, while British citizens who had lived abroad for more than 15 years couldn't.
This is misguided because it assumes a) that the problem is related to the person being discriminated against, b) that only women are discriminated against.
The preference for women means less opportunity for gay men, disabled men coloured men, etc. either because it is a perfectly good excuse to say that their company is diverse (when it really isn't) and because there are less jobs available.
Diversity means just that, i.e. a lack of differences in peoples experiences and characteristics. Even when they have 50% male 50% female on the board, they will still be mostly straight , able bodied, white, and middle to upper class, and in Britain most likely went to the same schools. And also you will still see that the grounds and windows cleaner are men and that the secretaries, receptionist, and office cleaners are women.
Apple don't invent, they innovate:
-The Neonode N1m had slide to unlock in 2005
- Apple didn't invent the touch screen even the capacitive touch screen (the first to really allow a finger control rather than stylus) was brought to market by LG (the Prada) before Apple.
-Windows mobile had been around for a while and could do many of the things (and more) that the iphone was credited with inventing. And don't forget many of the reasons the iPhone was sucessful as becuase of service providers (google maps anyone?)
-There were many tablets around before the iPad
-There were many mp3 players before the ipod.
Apple innovate they see a weakness in a product and buy technology that can help them create a more approachable product.
As that page states, clearly there never was a plan to ban any shape of banana, only to classify them using shape as one of the criteria (with highly curved being less good) as you explained.
Unless the leavers were actually not indignant because they thought the EU were trying to ban curvy bananas, but rather were upset that the poor defenseless fruit were being maligned, ..
It isn't bollocks if you use the service. Parents can only filter websites using the service if the child uses Edge (in Windows 10). Since some parents will assume that the filtering they set is watertight, and other browsers on the system are not controlling access this means the parents (who can still use the other browsers) are actually getting the restrictions they want.
I have to agree with the man.
I left the UK to work abroad because of the wealth/influence imbalance (coming from the north with a matching accent) I took my Master's degree and left. His being foreign may have actually aided him in some circles since a foreign accent is often considered better than a northern one.
I am very much European and trust Brussels more than London.
If this was a fair referendum (most expats can't vote) the contest would be over
.. but are they likely to sell twice as many books? Selling the same number of books at half the price is a kind of business suicide.
This doesn't apply to e-books for 3 reasons:
1) Twice as many ebooks sold doesn't cost a significant amount more.
2) Having more than twice as many people recommend your book (which they bought at 1/2 price-assuming the original valuation was fair) to others will take sales even higher
3) Having more than twice as many read your book means more people likely to read your next
There's also the little fact that immigration cuts both ways. When the UK closes its borders and sends all the immigrants home, what happens to the many 1000s of Brits working abroad?
If these, on the whole, well-educated and internationally experience workers, comfortable retirees have to relocate back to blighty it might be shock to find that the increased pressure in the middle of the jobs market means that those who couldn't compete for jobs with foreign workers (who didn't speak the language and did not have the advantage of a western European education) still can't compete. Plus there same will happen with the housing market.
1) "Given that Facebitchbook and Google are free to use then there's not in fact any inequality at all between our access to these things. So I do argue that, given that I think consumption inequality is the most important of the three, inequality is falling as a result of the digital revolution; that tech that y'all spend your time upon."
-So you say "consumption inequality" is falling as a result of the digital revolution
While citing :
"Silicon Valley, after all, has done little to equalise things like home ownership and there is no prospect of it ever disrupting the world of real estate."
-Which shows Morozov believes that the effect of the digital sector is only marginally important considering that its affects have very little knock (he uses Real estate as an example I believe).
Would you like to offer a real reason that why "consumption inequality" is falling overall as a result of the the digital revolution, such as the manner in which free email reduces the effects of poor diet (which are said to be increasing) , or how every body having access to the same web browser (assuming when you say 'everyone' you mean westerners who care to use the internet) balances early death becaue you can't afford the same medicines as the rich?
2) "is that there's three different types of inequality". Unfotunately, there are more types of inequality than 3 such as 'inequality of opportunity' (why do Eton dropouts stil do better that state school graduates?)
3) "Simply being around lots of other human beings increases economic output as there's more interaction and experimentation. That's also what makes housing more expensive in cities."
-Is it really? In that case I assume you can cite rearch that shows the cost of housing is directly related to economic output? So by your reckoning Monaco's economuic output is double Londons and nearly 10 time's Berlin's (here http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/most-expensive-cities)
I think you might not have understood the numbers. They describe vulnerabilities found that affect each system. Consequently, the same vulnerability can affect more than one version and is represented in the numbers multiple times.It therefore makes no sense to sumg the numbers for windows since the total is meaningless. An easy to see example is compariosn of v8 to v8.1 figures, which are identical because they share so much code that the vulnerabilities tend to work on both.
Your argument about including these things is a fallacy. For example we have not access to pensions until we can recieve them and only if we use them to subsist. Therefore, since we cannot sell, or transfer them they have not monetary value and cannot be wealth, any more than out existance has value. Furthermore, if what you are arguing is that these should not be taken into account for the wealthy either, and they are not unless they can be converted to monetary gain (such as cashing in a pension).
Overall this is a fallacy, this is similar to believing that the child of a millionaire is wealthy, they are not until they have control of something to the extent that it can be turned into monetary gain. Furthermore wealth is not projected into the future, it in a snapshot; so pensions which are only usable as pensions(can't be cashed) are not wealth since they are not presently held.
"developing kit capable detecting more than one fingertip at once, years before Apple did"
-Why is apple the big deal here? They invented nothing to do with multi-touch technology which are why all their patents concern doing things with multi-touch rather than multi-touch itself.
By and large all of the technology in the iphone was previously used by other companies. In the mobile sphere they excel at interface design and marketing, they do not invest much in technology per se (comparatively when compared to Microsoft, Samsung or Nokia) and consequently were not the competition to this UK inventor.
"over the top" players who piggyback the world's expensive network infrastructures - give away their services for free. They'd prefer us to believe it's through benevolence. They like to promote the idea of a sharing hippy utopia, and slack-jawed academics applaud this. But I would argue that another motivation is that said free services are a powerful barrier to competition, and ultimately, the emergence of a real digital economy.
This is nonsense google don't piggy back on anything, they pay for bandwidth the same as everybody else. And their services aren't free they are paid for by advertises. This is a standard form or market interaction the same way that most commercial tv and radio staions work.
The thing is that network companies don't like the idea that after paying for the infrastructure and being paid by people to use it they are only being able to charge based on what it costs them , not what it is worth to the user. The is analogous to a tool bridge that charges higher prices to taxis that family cars. This doesn't normally happen so why should it be allowed to now.
This whole article is a whine becuase smaller companies aren't doing so well as larger ones and that if we made the larger companies pay more and that consumers paid more everything would be alrright because smaller companies would also get paid more.
This is completely wrong. the tax issue is just that, a tax issue and the laws should be changed to stop it happening. The rest of the article is beside the point.
I have a number of problems with this list:
1) how can the mac book air win when it left ethernet and other connections. It doesn't look so sexy with all the necessary dongles hanging of it.
2) The PS3 only if you work work the North Korean Airforce would you be desparate enough to include this a a "computer".
3) What about the Sinclair QL (or at least the Spectrum+).
There I feel better now.
Since it was the John Jay Science and Engineering Academy can't they just expel her for her showing a complete lack of scientific and engineering aptitude?
This wasn't a normal school why was she going there if she had such deeply irrational belief system?
Wo there are so many issues with this :
"Many users did not go onto the NT range until Windows 2000, the first popular version for business and consumers."
-No that was XP, 2000 could never really be described as popular with consumers
" Windows 7 has failed to win users back from Macs, whose market share has continued to increase, though even in the US Gartner estimates Apple's share as only 13.6 per cent.
A bigger Apple factor is the touch user interface which evolved from iPod to iPhone to iPad"
-13.6 perecent is now not then it was much lower then. And so far as touch interfaces go the iPod didn't have one until 2007 when the iphone came out, where as MS had pocket PC, windows mobile and windows tablet PC (not finger touch because of the hardware but stylus tocuh) by the time the iPhone came out so your point about "A bigger Apple factor is the touch user interface which evolved from iPod to iPhone to iPad." is nonsense. It makes more sense to say that MS blazed the tocuh interface trail which apple then extended when the hardware to remove the stylus became available (capacitive touch screens). please don't expect people who used tocuh interfaces for years before the iPhone to buy into the Apple invented touch interfaces junk.
As you said this works best in French.
The English have Nordic Gods in the mix (Odin's Day-Wednesday; Thors' Day -Thursday; Frier's (Odin's wife) Day -Friday)
BTW Dimanche is the lord's day and stem's from Domus (latin for lord) I believe.
This is amazing that no real linguists have answered this thread.
Also, it is interesting to add that Babel is supposed to have been in the Anatolia area so this may have a connection.
Sorry all, I am not a grammar Nazi or anything like that and I know it is off topic BUT :
When you an "x much less y" structure such as:
"20 years from now, much less 2" or
"30 years from now, much less 10"
x should be a smaller number than y.
Phew! I feel better, for some reason that was doing my head in.
Th eproblem is that the old way of distributing music meant they could control the supply that consumers percieved (the top 10) this meant the demand for these was artificially high and the value of the products was also high, and artificially structured (all CD/Vinyl cost a similar amount whether they were super popular or less so). This has changed, the top 10 is now the top 100, people can now get individual songs and not albums with 60% filler so their perception of the value of the product has reduced but the Music industry can't handle that ("Spotify is both too expensive[for the users] and too cheap [for the labels] at the same time"). Until percieved value and sale value align piracy will remain a major problem and legal retailers will suffer.
This guy is missing a few points:
1) Prior to the digitial age he would be selling 0 music because his records would appear in so few stores, if you remember only local bands/ very popular bands and clasic albums were sold because of store space.
2)Why do musicians feel that they should all be able to charge the same price for their product, no other area of commerce has this feature; why is it assumed all music has the same value?
3) The word artist is an emotive word which has no real meaning, the man in the street would normally view that an artist is not simply a practioner of an art but someone who is recognised by most people to be GOOD at that practice.
Overall I feel that the problem is that musicians have an over inflated sense of entitlement. They should not expect people to pay inflated prices for products that in many cases do not meet expectations. If they want people to buy their products they should ask logical prices and people to return the product if it is not up to expectation. Otherwise the situation will stay the same, i.e. people downloading music on a whim and only purchase music that has real value to them.
What arrogance. Living in poverty with no prospects has always been the cause of revolutions, but apparently this time it was a western web site which caused it even though most of the people taking part in the revolution have never seen it.
What an arrogant technocrat.