Re: Geo-location?
Because if Google does start doing this, I'm going to be using a US proxy to carry out all my searches.
521 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Sep 2009
Tits down is situation normal for many of us. If our tits were pointed up, that would indicate one hell of a bra malfunction.
I would have thought the reverse. The purpose of a bra is to keep the tits supported, or "up" in other words. Only if the tits were down could the bra be said to have malfunctioned.
What I want to know is why being "titsup" is so bad? Ignoring the possible gender based stereotyping for a moment, I would have thought that "titsdown" would be a more apposite expression....especially considering "up" is a well understood term for operational and "down" is an equally well understood term for non-operational (system is down, aircraft is down etc.)
Oh come on - we've had "Listen", "Mummy on the Orient Express", "Flatline" and "Time Heist" in descending order of greatness, which makes nearly half of the current series which were highly memorable. I think this is higher than Matt "Fluffy Bunny Doctor" Smiths incarnation. I grant that David Tennant incarnation stands well above the rest, but the series with Capaldi is certainly not lacking.
You would think that rotating it through 180 is the answer, wouldn't you? Unfortunately the prop stand on the standard case is on the same side as the USB connector and on the other long side is the mini-HDMI connector for plugging into your telly.
In addition there are also a few Android apps that fail to detect which way is up. Amazingly a flight sim (Winds of Steel) happens to be one of them!
Mrs Aurelius also bought one of these devices. After using a large frying pan and pliers to assist in removing her firm grip from the device, I can also attest that it is stunning value for money.
It feels lighter than the original Hudl, which is solid enough to use as a club in an emergency.
In short, if you need a tablet and especially if you have some Tescos vouchers, run as fast as you can to get one of these devices.
I love our new LED light emitting overlords, and indeed my entire house is now filament and flourescent free (I might have missed the fridge light) but the one thing I can confidently say it won't do is reduce energy consumption. There will just simply be more lights (and light pollution), and more TV displays (I have 5 if you include computers, not counting laptops)
There will just be more people with hideous Christmas light decorations on their front garden, and they'll run from October to March.
I'm sure it didn't give an episode by episode critique of any of the last series.
I'm preferring Peter Capaldi over Matt Smith, who sucked in comparison to the awesomeness of David Tennant, but I agree the plots are a little on the patchy side. "Listen" however was up there with "Blink".
The thing is Doctor Who has so many aspects and has to appeal to all those aspects. There are the people who expect the traditional opponents and there are those who want new ones. It has to appeal to kids and also appeal to its huge adult fanbase. There are some people who want sci-fi rigor and those who are aware that it just ain't gonna happen. It can't possibly do everything within one episode and therefore you can only hope that the series as a whole satisfies.
Matt Smith wasn't a really good Doctor IMO. It was partly because he had an incredibly hard act to follow in David Tennant.
Also Karen Gillan was good eye candy but a bit lacklustre in the character/ personality department. Jenna Coleman manages to sparkle more but I do think she is let down a little by the scripts which are overall good (especially Listen), but don't give her a satisfying part.
Peter Capaldi has been a pleasant surprise after Matt Smith. A more serious and abrasive character, yet able to carry off the comedy well.
The Macintyre case did not really involve Boris Johnson; it was the mother attempting to get an injunction.
However the courts took the view that Boris Johnson sexual proclivities and behaviour were of sufficient public interest to override the privacy rights of third parties; in other words bad behaviour in public office is not a private matter.
What I am attempting to say is that this case gives newspapers wide latitude in the reporting of the private lives of public individuals. Also the paper will no doubt argue that he has used the fact he is "happily married in a great relationship" to get elected and therefore it is a matter of interest if he's been lying.
The Mirror does appear to have been behaving in a bad way, but legally they have a strong case and may be in the clear in terms of any criminal or private actions against them.
I would be interested to know if the paper published any of the photos sent by the MP and whether that is a breach of his copyright. However, I think the paper has a reasonable Public Interest defence, simply by quoting from the ruling in the above case.
In a ruling that could redraw the privacy rights of public figures in England and Wales, the court of appeal said: "It is not in dispute that the legitimate public interest in the father's character is an important factor to be weighed in the balance against the claimant's expectation of privacy.
"The core information in this story, namely that the father had an adulterous affair with the mother, deceiving both his wife and the mother's partner and that the claimant, born about nine months later, was likely to be the father's child, was a public interest matter which the electorate was entitled to know when considering his fitness for high public office."
They'll have to go to the Supreme Court to overturn this, so it's going to be long winded and expensive.
The only reason the Panzer III wins is if you include the Stug-III self-propelled gun/tank-destroyer.
The Panzer-III in basic form was the most numerous German tank in 1941 but by 1943 was out of the front line. Also numerically less were produced (5,000 than the Pzkw IV or Panther. The original idea of the Panzer III being the lead tank backed up by IVs didn't last for a long time in the face of opposition by Grants, Shermans and T-34s
Yes but having the fuel tanks blow up is not a problem. As long as an engineer platoon can pick the tank up and repair it or use it for salvage everyone is happy
What you're really trying to protect in a tank is the crew, so you're trying to prevent crew compartment fires and explosions, and spalling (lumps of metal flying round the crew compartment killing everyone)
The T-34 was a good enough tank, but its abilities were over-rated. The primary advantage of the T-34 was the fact that the Russians made lots of them, but they also lost a lot too. The previous poster mentioned an 8-1 advantage, which was also approximately the kill ratio that the Germans scored against Russian tanks through the war.
Shermans, on the other hand were a much better tank than reported. They were one of the first tanks able to fire accurately on the move. They were a good compromise of speed, gun, armour, reliability and mobility. Their early tendency to blow up was mainly due to ammunition storage issues, which was solved by storing the ammo in the bottom of the tank in water/anti-freeze filled boxes. The Israelis were still using variants of the Sherman up to the 1980s.
Panther IVs were the workhorse of the German army through the middle of the war and an adaptable capable vehicle.
Every man and his dog claimed to be fighting Tiger tanks when most of the time it would be Panzer IV or Panthers. Tigers also broke down if you looked at them funny.
Panzer IV: 8,500 approx
Panther: 5-6,000 approx
Tiger I: 1,500 approx
Tiger II: 500 approx
Against this we have
T-34: 35000
T-34/85: 30000
Sherman: 40000-45,000
I bought a Moto G LTE because it was not a monster phone but good value for the price. I have a Samsung Note and a Tablet anytime size matters (I'm probably going to combine the Note and Tablet into a single device).
What really matters so far as I'm concerned is battery life. Most phones seem to be trying to get very thin. Personally I would be happy with double the thickness if I could get a battery that got me through a working week without trying.
It was an interesting read, but what he's saying is that if no "easy" mineral deposits are found then the price will go back up and they can merrily start reopening Cornish and Czech tin mines.
He's also saying that there are huge resources that probably dwarf anything previously extracted because the real issue was transportation, not ease of extraction, and therefore there is no end of resources for the foreseeable future.
The only place where this may be different is oil/gas and here technologies such as fracking and improved drilling have so far come to help out. The problem with oil and gas of course is that its products are not going to help the environment unless you want a suntan whilst your cruise ship is floating round the drowned cities of London and New York.