Posts by Intractable Potsherd 4162 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
"Cigarettes are fine, its rollies that are tricky, especially if you use filter tips."
I don't know if that was meant as a joke, but I used to go out on events with a friend who did that very thing whilst driving! There isn't much that makes me nervous as a passenger (hell, I navigate on rallies!), but that always made me feel uncomfortable!
Don't know if it has any relevance (probably not), but I watched the highlights of the German GP on the web version of iPlayer at about 11pm on Sunday night* here in Dundee. The only thing of note was that there were fewer buffering interruptions than usual.
*After I'd been to see Monty Python (almost) Live at the local cinema.
"Anyone who's ever fought their way through Kobo's system will welcome Amazon's far easier system with open arms. Kobo's site is truly, truly awful."
I'm not sure whether you mean consumer or author side there, but, as a happy owner of a Kobo Touch for a couple of years who has recently started buying from Kobo's site (I had a lot of books on my computer to catch up with), I don't find it particularly awful. It might not be quite as slick as Amazon - which is, to me, the pinnacle of ease - but it is far from the car-crash you make it out to be.
Kobo does have problems, such as the risk of them completely changing the functionality of the reader with each f/w update, but the website isn't that bad.
I'm just buying a house within 10 minutes drive from Leuchars. Can't decide whether the geeky "Whoa, I could be living near a spaceport!" or the timid "Whoa, I could be living near a spaceport!" should win out. It doesn't matter though - Mrs IP will make us move (again) if they do choose the site on the basis of noise - though I doubt there will be many places within a reasonable distance from her work that would be immune from the crackly roar of rocket engines ...
Answering my own post - there is a tool for comparing critics' opinions with your own at http://www.wisegeek.com/which-movie-reviews-should-i-believe.htm. It is limited to well-known critics, but it is interesting - I would never have thought that Rotten Tomatoes agreed with me 70% of the time (on the films used for the assessment).
Since I haven't found a professional reviewer that reliably mirrors my idea of what a good movie is*, it makes no difference to me what they say. If I like the look of a film's trailer, I'll go and see it close to its release date regardless of what reviewers say. If I'm not so sure, I'll wait until IMDB has got several reviews and then look at a selection of the best and worst comments. Over a year, I probably see about one film a month at the local cinema thanks to Orange Wednesdays (which doesn't resemble the chamber of horrors described by some here - never had a mobile go off, no laser pointers, no babies, no sticky carpets). I also like the adverts and trailers, much to Mrs IP's disgust - they provide a nice lead in to the film, and it feels like the supporting feature that used to be on before films when ah were a lad.
* There used to be a website that compared the ratings of professional reviewers with your own, but I don't know if it still exists. I'd be interested to see if there is a pro out there who thinks that "Wreck-It Ralph" is significantly better than "Citizen Kane", and "The Addams Family" beats "Psycho" into a cocked hat ...
Because even a pseudonym gives people the chance to look back at previous posts, and build up an idea of the persona behind it. I've had the same nom-de-plume on here for many years now, and that carries some meaning to those who visit regularly. It wouldn't make any difference if I gave my real name, except it would make me a bit nervous about making some comments - the world we live in makes certain opinions dangerous in the eyes of employers etc.
It really isn't so much different from going down to the pub, or being a member of a club (ate least for me) - I know people who only exist in that environment, as far as I'm concerned. I don't know their full names, what they do for a living, marital status etc. It makes no difference. I'd be extremely wary of anyone that came in and said "I'm not giving you any name at all", though.
Some people have reasons for being AC, which they will often justify. Others hide behind it to try to cause trouble with no reason. Based on your published comments and those in your linked page, you seem to fall into the latter group, though your anti-Windows stance does sound like a previously banned ex-commenter - long term readers will know who I mean.
Actually, I haven't been comfortable with the plotlines where Bond breaks the law for several years now. I am always annoyed that there isn't a scene at the end of those stories where he is disciplined and/or handed over to the police, with a lecture that being right doesn't justify illegality for an officer of the Crown.
[I know this sounds a sarcastic, but it isn't - I mean what I say.]
Cameron is just being a spineless twat*, proven by his comment that he doesn't want to be a prime minister explaining why a terrorist attack occurred. He doesn't have the courage to say "Damn the terrorists, there is no significant risk, privacy is more important". Whilst he still isn't top of my Prime Minister Hate List (Thatcher and Blair still vie for first place on that one), he just went into the top three.
* again.
Governmental figures under fire for allegedly covering up criminal activity in the 1980s, under further fire for appointing a clearly unsuitable person to head up the enquiry into said allegations - who would have guessed that there would be a "look over there - druggie-paedo-terrorists!!!" moment?
I still consider the politicians and civil "servants" in Westminster to be a bigger threat than any amount of drug dealers, paedophiles, or terrorists.
I had my house blurred some years ago. The StreetView picture was taken just prior to quite a lot of work being done on the house, and it didn't look good at a time I was getting ready to sell it. It isn't restricted to any stratum in society.
(I have just spotted that the copyright date on the StreetView image is now after the work was done, so I suppose I could have the blurring removed if I could be bothered ...)
The smart doorstep might have something going for it. OK, the rubbish squasher ("garbage compactor" is too American) and Lamson tubes are a bit on the silly side, but a compartment for leaving stuff seems sensible, especially for some types of building that don't have easy options for hidden storage. A quick search on the Devil's Own Search Engine* doesn't come up with anything on these lines, so maybe there is a business opportunity for someone.
* Google, of course.
"... most searchers would search again on:
a) Google.com
b) Bing
c) Yahoo
d) <other search engines go here>"
As a result of this ECJ ruling, I remembered using Copernic meta-search engine in the dark pre-Google days. I wandered over to Google to see if Copernic is still available, and it is: https://www.copernic.com/en/products/agent/. Maybe this is the right to be forgotten enabling something else to be remembered.
"Now, forget about fridges for a sec - if every door in my house had RFID sensors, and every item was chipped up, I would save hours every week looking for stuff."
This is something that could be the breakthrough for this stuff. Forget about bunging all this stuff on the internet - just keep it within the home so that it works for the individual. I'd be quite happy for a system like this, preferably with an ability to assess the height above the floor of the last movement, so I can at last prove that it wasn't me that moved it*!
* Whatever the "it" is that can't be found.
But, based on previous form, unless your IndieTube is set up exactly right from the outset, it will get successful enough for Google or similar to notice it, buy it (because the owners get currency signs before their eyes and agree to sell), then kill it. Rinse and repeat.
Well, we haven't technically "met", but I sideload regularly. Admittedly, it is only AdBlock Plus which isn't allowed on the Play store (adblockplus.org/blog/adblock-plus-for-android-removed-from-google-play-store), but at the open nature of Android means I can get around Google's edict.
In what world do you live where 600 miles to a tank of petrol (not diesel) is a criticism??? I don't buy new cars (it's a matter of pride to keep cars going as long as I can), and the maximum range I have had out of a car was 600 miles in a 1999 diesel Citroen Xantia. The Subaru Legacy (naturally aspirated petrol) I have had for the last nine years will just about do 400 miles if I drive like a granny down the motorway. I have recently had hire cars that might have done a bit more than 600 miles, again, if driven very economically (I think the Citroen C3 Picasso was in that ball-park). However, I do like my mate's recently acquired four year-old Renault Megane Sportback 1.4 - we recently went a 300 mile trip to Norfolk and back in a day, and the range indicator suggested we could have done another 500 miles!
tl;dr - 600 miles is a good range. What was your point?
On the other hand, my wife is from one of the countries that is anal about titles, and was delighted to move to the UK where she could lose the "Dr Mgr Mgr", and not even have to use the Dr if she didn't want to - something that is akin to fraud in the minds of her countryfolk. Personally, I tend towards the attitude of "If you are not a medical doctor, it is confusing to use the title. Just use your name and PhD after it if it is relevant (which in most cases outside work, it isn't)".
There is a point to be made about how difficult it is to get the relevant information displayed in modern cars. I rent cars several times a year, and they don't usually have the manual with them. Trying to find simple things like how to reset the trip meter can take a quarter of an hour, and the staff at the rental agency usually don't know. Now with electronic keys, finding where the slot is can take time, too (what the hell is wrong with the standard place on the steering column?).
"The unpleasant and pervasive noise of traffic is on the threshold of becoming an avoidable evil, and clowns who like the status quo are working hard to keep cars noisy." Now, it is interesting you mention this. Mrs IP and myself have been looking for the next Potsherd Manor, and kept running into a problem with road noise. Mrs IP wants to live where she can't hear vehicles at all - she gets quite agitated if her world is afflicted by the noises of civilisation*. I, on the other hand, get stressed if I can't hear noise, especially road noise.** I would have been overjoyed to live within earshot of the big dual carriageway hereabouts.***
*However, "civilisation" doesn't include railways, which she would have been happy to live near. She would also have been happy to live near the river or on the coast because of the noise - which to me is indistinguishable from the sound of a dual-carriageway or motorway about 100m distant ...
** I love having weekends away doing motorsporty things, since I arrange to stay at motorway hotels where I can hear the traffic - best nights' sleep I get in the year!
*** We have chosen the next house to be graced with our occupancy - as an exercise for the reader, I'll leave you to guess whose preference won ...
I've been thinking this for a while, but never got around to implementing it. It would be good for me because I tend to mess around formatting as I go along, instead of just getting the text down as quickly as possible. This nasty little error, which I haven't experienced (yet??) has just about persuaded me to change.
Sorry, Lester - I've seen Rockall, and it exerted no pull over me at all. Put a lighthouse on it, and I might want to go, but as it is, I just regard it as another bit of rock in the sea. This isn't to say that people who go and try to spend time on it are wrong, but I had to counter your hyperbole in case anyone thought there is some Dr Who-type villain* inexorably drawing people there after one glance.
* Silurians, probably.
Whilst there is a lot of old-skool document processing going on, I have to say it isn't universal. I'm just int the process of buying a house, and haven't yet met my solicitor despite retaining him about eight weeks ago. Everything has been done by phone or email, which suits me down to the ground.
The difference is, the information Google et al holds* isn't likely to get you on a no-fly list, affect your employment prospects, destroy your family, lead to criminal prosecutions etc. Nothing these companies hold is likely to hurt you. Also, whether you like it or not, people get something that they feel is positive from Google et al - not so with the excessive spying in by the government. No-one expects to be spied by the State on just because they exist - no cause, no reason, no justification. Basically, to equate the two is specious in the extreme.
*At least, until it is sequestered by the government.
I find it difficult to accept the "intending murder" aspect, given the requirements in most common law countries. Criminal act manslaughter is the highest I can come up with in the UK context, maybe culpable homicide in the US?
Let's save murder for the worst acts of deliberate killing, eh? (I never have agreed with death from intentional GBH being counted as murder.)
I agree to an extent that it is difficult to comprehend why it should be any worse to point a laser at a plane than it is to have: cyclists with lights so bright that if they were on a car they would need to be dipped; cars such as modern Landrover products with lights so bright, and at the right height to be at eye-level, that they seem to be white lasers; and the number of cars with failed leveller motors so that dip beam looks like main beam. However, as someone else has mentioned, there is always the option to stop your car, which doesn't exist in plane. A plane crash also has a bigger chance of being catastrophic than a car crash.
"... it scares me to think what a nutter with one of the higher powered pointers could do if they were to intentionally shine it in people's eyes ..."
I had this happen some years ago, admittedly when laser pointers were a lot less powerful and only came in red (thankfully). A bunch of kids were standing on the edge of a traffic roundabout, and one of them had a laser pointer s/he was shining into drivers' eyes. (I had typed more, but I don't want to risk giving stupid people ideas)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
