nav search
Data Centre Software Security DevOps Business Personal Tech Science Emergent Tech Bootnotes
BOFH
Lectures

* Posts by Kiwi

2361 posts • joined 26 Sep 2011

Astroboffins say our Solar System could have – wait, stop, what... the US govt found UFOs?

Kiwi
Silver badge

Re: Nice article, Ms. Quatch!

This seems to clearly be a case of pushing an offensive gay leftwing agenda where it doesn't belong.

I'm both gay and pretty much a lefty at that (left of centre with right-wing traits sure, but mostly lefty).

I am quite happy to say such stuff as what has been discussed here does not belong in Dr Who. They started this stuff with Eccleston(sp), continued it to some degree under Tennant, I don't recall much of it under Smith of Capaldi but by the time we got through half of the Capaldi stuff that was it for me+Dr Who. There's the old series around, and I'd rather watch an episode made up from poor quality still pictures where the audio is more hum than speech, where it's been through several VCR's and the early text to describe what was going on has largely lost its definition (and is thus unreadable) than watch the modern versions. I quite liked most of the writing during Tennant's tenure, didn't mind Eccleston or Smith, but the first season with Capaldi was just too much (it's not really him as an actor, though how he portrayed the Dr may've had a bearing - but actors can only do so much with that level of crap writing!).

I think it was the one with the monster hatching from the moon and laying another egg that instantly became a new moon that finally stopped us watching.

3
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Seriously, the god stuff?

Really? Biologists are not scientists?

Name one _respected_ biologist that says that evolution is nonsense.

I'll get to your other stuff later, just dropping this one here for now.

Would Raymond Damadian do for a start?

Of course, I also mentioned Francis Collins in the post you were replying to, or do geneticists not count in your books?

There's a couple. Or do you believe that the man credited with inventing the MRI and one of the leading physicians in the USA aren't exactly "respected scientists" - or despite their work being within the field of biology will you claim they're not biologists?

And I'm pretty sure I did not say that any of them claimed evolution was nonsense (they may have done but I am not currently aware of such claims). I was the one making that statement.

0
1
Kiwi
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: Seriously, the god stuff?

> And yet there's a great many respected scientists who'll tell you that creationism fits the evidence far better than this evolution nonsense.

Except a) they are not 'scientists',

Really? Biologists are not scientists? Physists are not scientists? I guess that explains a lot about your posts.

I'd forgotten the likes of Einstein, Newton, Kepler, Faraday to name a very small few were not scientists and did not have the respect of the scientific community. There's that guy Francis Collins as well, but he's some unknown wannabe who has no standing or respect whatsoever in the scientific community. There's that guy Kelvin as well, but then he was forgotten - not like he had a temperature scale named after him or anything. Max Planck was, of course, as thick as 2 planks when it comes to quantum theory. Nope, you're right, not one of these people were scientists or in any way respected.

Oh, and tell me how you can test evolution? Can you present me with a copy of the dinosaur DNA that birds evolved from? It should be easy if it can be tested like you claim? Can you present one proven example of changes necessary for microbe-man evolution? Just one? there's supposed to have been millions of them, so just one verifiable change shouldn't be much to ask?

Just one? One teency tiny wee proven change?

No? Guess that means evolution is un-testable then.

0
5
Kiwi
Silver badge

That no one was involved in a crash proves that it was done safely .

No it does not 'prove' that it was done safely at all.

Really? Everyone came out ok; no accidents, near-misses, surprises or anything like that, but it wasn't safe? No "pucker moments", no evasive braking or steering, nothing. Not safe?

I know of people who have driven in residential areas legally at speeds over 200km/hr without driving police cars. Remember when we used to have the Mobil 1 (IIRC was a long time ago!) in Wellington? The Hamilton V8 street racing? (and no I am not claiming I was involved in any of these)

That was in very controlled conditions and only by drivers that were rated for those conditions. That is a very different thing than driving fast where other drivers of variable skill may appear. For those races the road was aligned and resurfaced with a special mix that was rated for the speeds of those cars and it was levelled to ensure safety. No other roads in NZ are made to those standards.

Seriously? WOW! I didn't know they could do that! Re-align several Wellington streets, re-surface them with a "special mix", re-level them (taking out the camber which on many corners actually helps drivers), then put in some replica road markings and even fire-hydrants (see the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIGREJAw8kU, at around the 10-minute mark (that yellow thing in the middle of the road is a NZ fire hydrant) (video is just the Nissan Mobil 500 so they probably don't reach the 200k mark in that "clip") - they do all that re-aligning and surfacing and changing the road markings etc etc, all in a day or so as not to upset the locals (especially the port, businesses etc etc for cargo handling and commerce), and then they undo it all to take the roads back to exactly as they were before suffice for a few replica skid marks?

(For something more recent, there's a clip of the Hamilton (NZ) V8 races at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP8HikAT_wI in which you can clearly see the replica road markings they must put down (if what you say about resurfacing with "special mix" etc is true).

This is done all over the world; Isle of Man, Monaco, IIRC some of the V8 stuff in Oz (etc etc where they have street racing).

As to "driver ratings" - what of the many "open" races, including the many rallies on some of our wonderful gravel roads? We have races here on a variety of roads, often with drivers who've barely learnt how to use "big boy pants" let alone how to handle a car.

Ah, you must be one of those who have downvoted me

Actually, no, I have never downvoted _anyone_, nor upvoted.

My apologies then.

Are you one of those people who thinks that "nothing bad will happen ...

> One of those people perhaps who believes ...

No. No.

Thank God for that! Those people scare the hell out of me!

Oh. Because I know that our speed limit is arbitrary (that's why the government has just voted to raise it in certain areas!)

The speed limit is set based on the state of the road, its surface, its camber, curves, sight lines and many other issues. NO road is New Zealand is safe to be driven on at 180kph, not even by emergency services.

And yet, again, we have street races that top those speeds. We've had that done by emergency services as well. Admittedly this is for stretches rather than the whole road, but yes. The Auckland motorway with all onramps closed? Not a problem. In fact you could do over 300k on most stretches of that without issue (and no, I've not experienced those speeds in a stock road vehicle). The waikato expressway is able to support those speeds, and even the Kapiti expressway and SH1 through the Wellington motorway would easily be above 200 (for stretches under controlled conditions). SH2 via the Hutt Valley not so much, but there are stretches that'd be OK.

But explain the Ngarunga gorge road - a 6-lane motorway with a legal limit of 80Kph down most of it. However, before the corner at the bottom with a 75Kph advisory speed, it becomes 100Kph. Near the speed camera (the most profitable in NZ, which BTW cannot get photos of people speeding in the fast lane on the uphill side (where the most crashes occur) giving the lie to the "protecting people" vs revenue gathering line!). The only reason for the 80k limit is the camera, and when you're around the curve out of sight of the camera it becomes 100k. However, we have many tight, winding gravel roads that have a posted limit of 100k. Set on the condition of the road? Try driving on NZ roads and see if you can honestly say that!

You would be hard pressed to find tires that are rated to do 180kph, especially on the road surfaces found in NZ.

You are kidding, right? My bike has ultra-cheap ultra-crap ultra-nasty hard-rubber tyres. I don't drive in a way that needs higher grip tyres, I'm not really interested in pushing the bike hard (and I like gravel roads so soft-compound tyres aren't an advantage). Same for my car's tyres (both vehicles are "H" - rated for 210K).

I've checked a couple of friend's cars, both V rated, as in 240Km/hr.

H-rating is very common for bikes. Many bikes I know have V and W ratings, and one has a Z rating (but the tyre itself only lasts a few hundred K, that guy has way more dollars than cents!). These are not special order tyres but over-the-counter stuff. I'd love to show you sites that cover it but as always NZ businesses don't like to have their products readily listed on their websites. You can see the ratings if you visit https://www.franksmc.co.nz/Tyres-Oils#ROADTYRES and hover over the pictures of tyres - no one else locally lists ratings.

Or you can go in/phone any motorbike store and ask any about them if you want. For my car's tyres (170x70R13) I can only find H(210K) or T(190K) rated tyres locally - ie the only options for my car are over 180, so I'm "hard pressed to find" a tyre LOWER rated.

The road surface can be another issue, but safe driving takes that into account anyway. Many roads can handle the speed fine on straights and gentle curves, but the volcanic chip can be interesting if you push things. Fastest I've been on gravel on a bike IIRC is only about 130K, but that was on a private track, with the right tools for the job.

https://www.webbikeworld.com/motorcycle-tire-information/, http://www.weeksmotorcycle.com/tire-speed-rating.html and https://www.blackcircles.com/general/speedrating are some options for checking speed ratings.

Two roads have upped the limit to 110kph because they are new roads specifically engineered for faster speeds than has been the practice in the past.

7 by my count (though after much hunting (not much in the way of reliable sources) only 2 may currently have that limit), them being :

• Waikato Expressway: Longswamp, Rangiriri, Huntly, Hamilton, Cambridge, Ohinewai, Ngaruawahia, Te Rapa, Pokeno to Hampton Downs.

• Tauranga Eastern Link

• Upper Harbour Motorway

• Northern Motorway (Johnstones Hill tunnels to Lonely Track Rd)

• Southern Motorway (Bombay to Takanini)

• Kapiti Expressway (Mackays to Peka Peka)

(NZTA source)

However not all may be at that limit yet (I thought it was to be by the end of the year, which is yesterday, but ICBW). The southern motorway certainly is not new. Not unless you count 1970s as "new" (by which definition I am quite young despite well past the wrong side of 40 :( ) - see this wikipedia article for more info, maybe. (I was only doing a quick check there because I'm pretty sure the southern motorway fails any definition of "new").

What you have failed to notice is that I have not said half of what you imagine.

What you failed to notice is that I haven't imagined anything, I have only responded to exactly what you _said_. It is you that imagines things, such as me down voting, what you think I believe, or you being safe.

I've been an advanced safety instructor in the past. I've had training above most road users and keep my hand in. I have a much better idea of what is safe than most people, and I know my vehicles limits better than most people. You somehow think I have travelled at over 180k in unsafe and uncontrolled conditions. I've not opted to tell you what the conditions were but have given you many possibilities (some or all of which may or may not be what I experienced). You've written 'interesting' stuff about re-surfacing roads with "special mixes" for street races, and the speed rating of tyres, yet claim I don't know my stuff.

I made an assumption about your voting record which I got wrong, you have made assumptions about my driving experience and history which you got wrong. But you also went on to make up stuff (if not out of your own head where did you get the garbage about "special mix" and re-alignments etc being used on the Wellington and Hamilton roads?) to support your arguments.

I'm sure you can do better. If you try. Meanwhile, please tweet if you're ever driving on NZ roads because I'm concerned you may be putting to much of your mental resources into fabricating tales of miraculous road transformations being done in a few hours and not enough resources on the road around you.

0
3
Kiwi
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Seriously, the god stuff?

"Name one bit of scientific proof that the God I follow does not exist"

The utterly overwhelming observable evidence for evolution over creationism for a start.

And yet there's a great many respected scientists who'll tell you that creationism fits the evidence far better than this evolution nonsense.

How could life have started accidentally in a random pool of chemicls when even under controlled laboratory conditions our best minds cannot get the right mix of chemicals necessary to life? They can create a few amino acids but not in a form that supports life.

How could the chemicals form in the right order to make even the most basic chain of DNA that could allow for a simple organism that could reproduce? What about all the "machinery" needed to interpret DNA and make proteins etc after that? Remember, all this has to work right first time. Microbes that cannot reproduce cannot be a starting point, they have to be able to survive long enough to reach a reproductive stage even if it is "simple" splitting. And even that has proved to be far more complex than Darwin imagined in his worst nightmares.

Maybe you're one of those ones who believe life couldn't have evolved on earth, and the earth was seeded by aliens? How did they get their start? The same problem, just a different planet.

As yet there is not one observable proof of evolution. The "evidence" you claim is also used by Creationists to show that evolution is NOT something realistic.

So you've failed. I asked for something that is scientific proof, and you toss in something that has failed time and again? Surely with all those quoted "hundreds of thousands" of bits of proof you can come up with something much much better? No?

0
5
Kiwi
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

"Hell, you even believe that dinosaurs died out millions of years before the first man came along despite abundant proof (cave drawings, figurines, carvings, eye witness accounts etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc) that man and dinosaurs lived together."

No such evidence exists. And just LOL at "eye witness accounts" Someone is feeding you bs. I'm guessing you must be an American...or otherwise exceptionally gullible. Or trolling.

Ah, you must be one of the "They were tripping and drawing monsters they dreamed up" that just happen to bear an uncanny resemblance to dinosaurs?

IIRC as recent as the 1950s there were some interesting stuff out of some African and other areas. And of course there's the whole "dragon" thing. A look at many of those and you can see they've taken on all sorts of fanciful things, but there are "dragon" stories that don't involve the creatures breathing fire flying. Many of the descriptions bear an interesting resemblance to known dinosaur forms. The word "Dinosaur" only came to us I believe in the mid 1800's (1860-something?), and the concept of "dragon" does in most respects very closely resemble a "terrible lizard" in most tales. Many IIRC even refer to dragons as "Lizard".

Around the world creatures survive very much unchanged since the age of the dinosaurs. There's bacteria that are the same as their forms found in fossils, some fish, and larger creatures such as IIRC crocs and/or gators. An event that wipes out so much of life but leaves such a broad range of life around - creatures that appear not even slightly fazed by the changes to the environment? A large range of cold-blooded creatures at that who'd be among the first to die in an environmental catastrophe?

You buy all this stuff and swallow it without even the slightest bit of thought or tiniest application of logic to see that not all the material matches, yet you call me gullible?

Then again, your "I'm guessing you must be an American" comment indicates that you may have difficulty seeing even the extremely obvious when it goes against your views.

0
4
Kiwi
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

Yes, this is why I can't believe in the god of religions. I can accept the idea that there may be a god. But not a god who is so needy that it needs us to worship and pray all the time, or follow all sorts of petty rules, beyond the basic level of decent behaviour. God may not be a mere human invention, but god the High Bureaucrat certainly has been made in our own image.

Many do follow a god of their own design (and yes try as I might I have done that myself).

God does not need us to pray, however like any Father He does want us to have a personal relationship with Him, and of course a relationship involves communication.

The rules we should follow are just as you said, basic decent behaviour. Jesus phrased it as "Love God, and love your neighbour as your self" and that sums up the 10 commandments. Things like not stealing from people, not cheating on your partner nor taking your friend's partner, not murdering someone, not stressing yourself over what your neighbours own that you don't etc etc.

Most countries laws are based around the last 6 commandments.

And no, I have no idea why God chose the rituals the Israelites were expected to follow. That He hasn't told me :)

1
2
Kiwi
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

I've recently been exploring some of the evidence put forth to suggest that The Earth is flat. There are some very awkward observations being made, lots of bunkum too, but definitely worth digging for the nuggets that will stretch your mind.

Yup, in some of the ones I've watched there's some interesting stuff. Some can be the result of optical effects with the air between two points refracting the light, some is clearly deliberately misleading (eg they claim something can be seen from a place where it would be impossible if the earth was curved, but if you look into it what they claim can be seen cannot be seen)

Just don't ever read the comments. There's depths of weirdness in there you don't ever want to look into! Even the worst of us here in El Reg don't plumb those depths!

1
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

No one with two clues is going to be convinced, except maybe biblical literalists (because they lack or suppress critical skills).

Wow, you really need to upgrade your own skillset some.

Almost looks as if you're taking some of this stuff quite personally!

0
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

It is unlikely that any of the Torah was written down before 'First Temple'...

https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/features/.premium-1.657492

Wow. Do you also believe what Abraham Lincoln said about believe quotes on the internet? After all someone published it on the internet so it must be true!

But you will believe your dogma regardless.

Look who's talking!

0
1
Kiwi
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

at speeds up to (and maybe over) 180km/hr, and my still being alive means I have safely travelled at such speeds on NZ roads

It means no such thing, it means that you are deluded.

You have read stuff into the message that was not stated.

I said that I have travelled at these speeds, I did not say I was driving.

That no one was involved in a crash proves that it was done safely . I know of people who have driven in residential areas legally at speeds over 200km/hr without driving police cars. Remember when we used to have the Mobil 1 (IIRC was a long time ago!) in Wellington? The Hamilton V8 street racing? (and no I am not claiming I was involved in any of these)

Please send me a tweet when you are about to go driving so that I can stay off the roads.

Ah, you must be one of those who have downvoted me for talking about having done driver training and taking time to know the limits of my vehicle, taking into account things that could influence my driving and so on.

Are you one of those people who thinks that "nothing bad will happen if you drive at the speed limit" rather than driving to the conditions? One of those people perhaps who believes they should rely on airbags and other stuff to protect them in a crash rather than using their brain to see a problem coming (eg stopped cars) and to slow down/take action before they run into a bunch of stopped traffic?

I keep my vehicle maintained, I practice braking and other emergency manoeuvres (in a safe area, like an empty car park) so if something happens I don't get surprised by how my vehicle reacts, and I keep my eyes on the road and the users around me. What, in all of that, makes me dangerous?

Oh. Because I know that our speed limit is arbitrary (that's why the government has just voted to raise it in certain areas!) and because under some unknown-to-you circumstance I have travelled at a speed above that and survived. Perhaps I was involved in some legal street racing, or I could've been a passenger in a cop car or other emergency vehicle in an emergency. Maybe I was in a light plane that landed or took off from a NZ road way (we used to have light planes used as emergency transport and they used to land and take off from nearby roads before we got the Westpac etc helicopters). Maybe I was a passenger in a prime minister's car on the way to a sports event.

Travelling at, above, or below the speed limit is no guarantee of what will or won't happen to you, nor is it proof of safe driving. Travelling at a speed appropriate for the conditions is. A well-trained driver taking someone to meet a rescue helicopter at speeds above the posted limit is perfectly fine, especially when the road they are on is in good condition and closed to other traffic.

what you have failed to notice

What you have failed to notice is that I have not said half of what you imagine.

3
3
Kiwi
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

"would love to know what makes it a "cop out". Should I disbelieve a basic truth just because it is basic?"

But it almost certainly isn't "true" that there is a god. There is no evidence whatsoever.

We exist, despite the odds of it. That's evidence (not proof, but evidence).

It's just a made up story that you were gullible enough to believe.

You believe that nothing created everything by magic.

I believe that someone created everything by the use of knowledge.

You believe a bunch of chemical reactions that, despite decades of trying by some extremely intelligent minds, have not been able to be replicated in labs beyond very basic levels (one out of hundreds (if not thousands) of reaction needed) - reactions that are absolutely necessary to happen in life but absolutely cannot occur in nature.

I believe someone used knowledge and "tools" to make those necessary reactions.

You believe that a bunch of impossible events happened to create stars and planets etc - yet it is now believed by a number of physicists that the forces involved in the spinning of a clump of dust would cause it to fly apart long before it could have the force of gravity needed to draw enough material to itself. And you believe that despite it being utterly impossible for stars to form naturally (at least within our current physics knowledge) that somehow somewhere a single star formed, ignihted, went super-nova, the shockwave of that being the necessary start to cause other stars to ignite which later going nova caused more new stars - despite the initial one being impossible and the shockwaves not actually being big enough.

I believe someone used knowledge to work around these issues and build the planets, stars, and other bodies we see (and many we don't).

You believe in a pile of magical asteroids that "just magically happened" to hit things in the right way at the right time to create the solar system that we have, doing some pretty neat magical tricks like changing the orbit of planets and their moons.

I believe that the reason we see so much evidence of design and creativity in these things is that someone exceptionally creative used their abilities to design and build these things for us.

You believe that I can take a 1 byte file, copy it over and over and over, and get a full OS, application suite after a while.

I believe that information needs intelligence.

Hell, you even believe that dinosaurs died out millions of years before the first man came along despite abundant proof (cave drawings, figurines, carvings, eye witness accounts etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc) that man and dinosaurs lived together.

I believe that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time.

No, the gullible ones are the people who buy all the big bang and evolution nonsense, who believe in lots of impossible reactions and other events that came about by convenient magical asteroids and other such nonsense. The ones who won't take some time to look over the evidence and apply some real thought to such matters, and challenge their beliefs rather than the intellectual equivalent of a child sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting "I can't hear you" (take a look at the language you choose to use if you want evidence of your doing that in your own post). These are the gullible ones.

Just like many of the ~ 2999 other religions on the planet that have some sort of magical sky fairy.

At least they have the starting point of believing in something as a point of creation, rather than the logical fallacy of believing that absolutely nothing suddenly turned into a vast multi-verse.

0
7
Kiwi
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

"The show me how to do it in the hostile conditions of early earth. There is no shred of evidence this is possible by natural causes "

Well actually we can already get most of the way there in the lab. For instance creating amino acids, creating self replicating ribozymes, creating chromosomes.

The trick is.. NOT doing it in the lab but doing it outside. Try using a lightning strike to supply the energy and see if anything is left afterwards. Try going against the natural chemical reactions to create the un-natural ones so important to life.

When it can be worked out how to provide the energy needed to kick-start the reactions without over-cooking and how to get the reactions to work in the right fashion without creating an abundance of chemicals hostile to life at the same time.

Then when you have your chemicals, you also have to find a way to combine them in the correct one out of ~ 1x10^56,000 (iirc) possible combinations.

Making a tyre does not give you a car. Making a bonnet does not give you a car. Making a door does not give you a car. Making a wooden block that almost looks like an engine if you squint at it funny does not make a car.

This is not rocket science. In fact, rocket science and making extremely "exotic" materials and fuels is bloody simple compared to this stuff!

2
3
Kiwi
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

...gullible idiots...

Sorry, didn't think this was a thread about MS users?

0
2
Kiwi
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

"God created all. God exists outside of time and matter, is without begining or end. That seems pretty simple and doesn't go back any further."

[..]

Aside from being a cop out and also arbitrarily claiming you know that God exists acausally whilst claiming him as a cause, on your terms it could equally be applied to a universe without a god:

Would love to know what makes it a "cop out". Should I disbelieve a basic truth just because it is basic? Lots of other stuff could be called a "cop out" but that doesn't stop them being true.

I don't break the speed limit because I don't want any more speeding tickets. I believe the limit of 100km/hr to be arbitrarily set and I believe I can quite safely negotiate most highways and many other sections of road in NZ at speeds up to (and maybe over) 180km/hr, and my still being alive means I have safely travelled at such speeds on NZ roads (not saying I was the driver, not admitting to any such driving). Saying I limit myself to the speed limit or less because I don't want tickets is, to many, what could be called a "cop out" especially when I have been challenged to a race on public roads. It may be a "cop out" but it's also true. So what? Truth is truth.

1. The universe has no beginning or end; it has and will oscillate forever between big bangs and big crunches. Job done.

The "big crunch" has long ago been debunked. There is no mechanism by which the universe could collapse (short of Mantrid sending all of his arms into the same general area). Current theory (semi-quoting a New Scientist article I haven't seen yet) suggests that the universe is now actually increasing the speed of expansion, and will reach such a point that the very fabric of matter will start to break up (interestingly something else hinted at in the Bible - talk of the very elements breaking up!) in something called the "Big Rip" (and yes, I did just learn of this in the last week or two and long to get to read more on it). So no, no oscillating between bangs and crunches. No crunchbang for you!

2. The universe was seeded from another universe orthogonal to ours, and so it's time does not flow for us. This one can also imply a vast profusion of universes bring the side effect of quantum effects in parent universes. Again, this can be argued as turtles all the way down. Crisis averted!

Aye, it could be. Does "cop out" of the whole "beginning" thing though (like the "life was seeded from another planet" since all the theories thus far about abiogenesis(sp) on Earth falling flat). I have seen some weird stuff that could suggest a parallel universe or few..

Ultimately, a slightly asymmetric explosion+the effects of gravity then creating stars and eventually all the rest are a much easier and more believable and more observable thing than the spontaneous existence of a superbeing with the knowledge and ability to create a universe at will; and any fudge you apply to justify him can also be applied to the Big Bang, still making the God proposition seem ridiculous in comparison.

You claim everything came out of nothing. I claim everything came out of something. Mine seems the more logical and sensible. It is your proposition that seems "ridiculous in comparison".

Must be those beers.

I guess another wouldn't hurt you then... (I have no problem with people drinking alcohol, but I have a different view on beer)

1
5
Kiwi
Silver badge
Paris Hilton

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

I guess you haven't heard of the Torah, which the bible is only a small part of...

The Torah?

You mean the writings of Moses, the first 5 books of the Tanach? The same Tanach that bears an uncanny resemblance to what Christians call the "Old Testament"?

What in my post makes you think that I've not heard of it?

3
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Angel

Re: The no true Scotsman argument

@Adair, 'complete misunderstanding of the nature of God' -- well, we have all sorts of ideas of God, but if God keeps handily being unable to be explained or proven to exist by humans, then what does it matter if he exists or not?

I had a neighbour I once accidentally offended. They went out of their way to effectively deny my existance. When I would give them a cheery greeting I'd be ignored. Try to help them, I'd be told (very impolitely) where to go. They made up some nasty false rumours about me.

In the end, I gave them what they wanted and made no more attempts to be nice to them.

It is much the same for those who refuse to acknowledge the abundant proof of God around them. He has given you many opportunities to see what is real, but you do not wish to do that. So for a time you will get your wish.

But He is patient and loving, and when you're ready, you will meet with Him, and He will be there for you!

(will this be my most downvoted post yet? Come on guys, trying to crack 1,000 downvotes here! :) )

2
3
Kiwi
Silver badge
Angel

Re: Guys!

An example of this is Christianity when the facts of the solar system were discovered. First, denial, then, their belief system was adjusted so that a heliocentric solar system was of course God's handiwork.

Actually, it wasn't Christianity that was denying a heliocentric solar system. There were some involved with another group who claims to follow Christ that denied this, but the Bible makes mention of things hateful to those (and to flat-earthers) eg referring to the Earth as a "ball" and also some stuff that could be hinting at orbital mechanics. But people here don't want to know that the Bible was talking of the "Big Rip" thousands of years ago, that thousands of years ago the expansion of the universe was mentioned in the Bible, and so much other stuff that science is "discovering" now that people who've been reading their Bible's could've told you hundreds of years ago (not that there was much reading of it back then but you get the idea).

Why do I continue to believe? Because I see scientific proof of God being discovered and reported in the likes of New Scientist on a very regular basis. That may not be their intent but when I see stuff that reinforces theories that Christians have come up with long past now being published in such places, I cannot help but smile, thank God for yet another bit of proof, and continue enjoying my day.

A few hundred years ago some Christians were claiming that the earth went around the sun as did the other planets, but the scientists of the day were telling the so-called "church leaders" that it was just not so and to claim the earth went around the sun was to somehow deny God.

0
3
Kiwi
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Seriously, the god stuff?

Can you disprove the existence of the christian/jewish/islamic god with 100% certainty? Yes, of course, it's already been done hundreds of thousands, if not millions of times. That god isn't real. it utterly fails every test. it does not exist.

Really? Then this should be a very simple challenge for you.

Name one bit of scientific proof that the God I follow does not exist. Just one, but it does have to be able to prove that He does not exist, as you yourself used the word "prove" in your statement.

Just one. Not much to ask if there are "hundreds of thousands" of examples out there for you to pick from.

1
1
Kiwi
Silver badge
Angel

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

There is no blind belief in science it is not like religion where the same "theory" is in place for 2,000 years and where you are not allowed to test or challenge it.

The Bible says "Prove that which is good", and also has several passages relating to testing and defending the faith.

A part of that is studying God's Creation and how it works. A great many early scientists were Christian and could trust experimental data because unlike many of the eg Greek gods, the Creator is not petty and does not change the laws of physics on a whim - you can trust that things will work according to the laws He laid down.

My faith is not blind. Parts of it especially in the earlier days have been, but all of it has always been subject to testing, proving, and if apparently in error re-thinking and perhaps removing. That God exists, created the universe etc - in that I have no doubt. The HOW and WHY of parts of that may have changed.

I count physicists and biologists among my friends, and in these I mean people of note.

And sadly yes, some Christians are quite rigid in their beliefs, especially on certain subjects. You can't imagine the number I've come across who would condemn me to some mythical "eternal punishment" because the circumstances of my life led me to being gay long before they led me to the Love and Forgiveness of Jesus - hence Romans 14:4 and 1 John 1:8-10 being amount my favourite verses (8&10 for them, 9 for me :) ).

You can test and challenge my faith. Sometimes I will bend (eg my nastier comments here), sometimes I will break (eg some of my moderated comments here), but I will heal and grow stronger in my faith. I welcome the challenge!

1
11
Kiwi
Silver badge
Angel

Re: Alien UFO's are Real - True / False...

Replying to myself, I just want to point out that demonstrating that the idea that a god is needed to explain the complexity of reality (aka the Divine Watchmaker argument) is self-contradictory as it leads to infinite regress is part of the 1st year syllabus in theology degrees.

One of the fundamentalists Christians here (sometimes putting the MENTAL in fundamental, I know...).

Just wondering if you'd mind explaining why you believe it "leads to infinite regress"?

God created all. God exists outside of time and matter, is without begining or end. That seems pretty simple and doesn't go back any further. One of the many issues with the Big Bang - everything had to come from absolutely NOTHING, no matter no energy nothing - unless (as another poster mentioned) something from another universe did something to create/spawn our universe.

(I've got to remember to read up on The Big Rip as well - sounds interesting...)

BTW, I've met people with theology degrees. Seems they should spend some time reading the Bible rather than studying people's views on other people's writings on the words of someone who was the 3rd cousin twice removed from someone who once met someone whose uncle thought he once heard the word "Bible". Seems that those with said degrees are at least that far removed from having actually read the Bible! Some certainly have had great trouble understanding basic concepts!

1
6

Ubuntu 17.10 pulled: Linux OS knackers laptop BIOSes, Intel kernel driver fingered

Kiwi
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: Accidental Aardvark

Remember - it's only M$-based machines that suffer mass virus infections!

That's NOT true! Why there was the.. er... er.. um.. Oh yeah, there was the Morris Worm! Proof that Linux, Unix, BSD and even OSX all get nasty mass infections just like Windows!

2
1
Kiwi
Silver badge
Pint

Re: I still prefer Linux

Even if this was 100% Canonical's fault (or the blame could be 100% attributed to Linux and/or open source/free software) and I bricked an expensive laptop, I would still use Linux and would still fully support open source.

I'm pretty sure someone who knows how to use a search engine could find a huge number of reports of Windows effectively bricking hardware - at least to the point where "expert intervention" is required. I can see in my "your topics" list a link to a thread on an article about printers being knocked out, just for a start.

1
0

Beyond code PEBCAK lies KMACYOYO, PENCIL and PAFO

Kiwi
Silver badge
Pint

Re: DILLIGAF

KBBC Keyboard blocked by cat

[cautiously glances at fur-lined feline occupying neighbouring chair] Nope, no idea what that's like...

2
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: TUBE

Re: TUBE

...or as it is properly known, sexual assault.

Only if done unwillingly.

1
0

'Please store the internet on this floppy disk'

Kiwi
Silver badge
Flame

Re: Printer Power

That's the best thing to do to a printer. Can't imagine why so many people want the blasted things...

Putting 400Kv across it's terminals would certainly turn it into a "blasted thing" I expect, and would also be quite terminal for it.

Now, if I can also find the testicles of the bugger who invented the blasted things, I have another experiment in mind for 400Kv...

(El Reg : We do not have a suitable EHT icon!)

#wishIwashereaweekago

0
0

Judge rm -rf Grsecurity's defamation sue-ball against Bruce Perens

Kiwi
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Look wookie

Look wookie

Talk some more shite

Wow. What a convincing argument! I'm gonna rush out now and and start supporting GRS. </sarc>

10
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Someone'll need to explain what rm -rf means...

Someone'll need to explain what rm -rf means...

....for all the Windows users reading this.

What it means is your system is borked because you forgot where you were when you typed it out of habit.. :)

rm = ReMove (I believe, could be corrected if necessary) -Recursive and -Force - ie delete all files, any subfolders and all of their contents, and do it without any further question/warning. Similar to the old "delete" or "Deltree" commands in windows (not sure if Delete could remove folders etc recursively).

(rm filename would just delete the file, but if there's an issue (aside from file ownership/permissions) it would prompt for further handling, the "-f" stops that)

2
0
Kiwi
Silver badge

Re: Grsecurity

Warning: Grsecurity: Potential contributory infringement and breach of contract risk for customers

There, I did it also, sue me, bloodsuckers!

Me to.

I consider the use of GR Security's products to potentially place your company at risk of contributory infringement and to also potentially place you at risk of breach of contract.

Make mine a sueball thanks!

4
0
Kiwi
Silver badge

Re: That's not how the law works.

he ... is intending on doing damage to their business.

Looks more like he is intending on protecting other businesses from using software that maybe falls into a legal grey area, which if said businesses are found to be using such software they could open themselves up to a lawsuit.

Even if those businesses were to eventually win the suit it can be costly and time-consuming to have to fight a case.

Suggesting certain risks with certain software is something a lot of people do. For that matter lots of us do it in other fields as well.

13
0

That was fast... unlike old iPhones: Apple sued for slowing down mobes

Kiwi
Silver badge

Re: That probably explains..

Problem with sealed-in battery with water-proofed device is it's expensive and difficult to replace the battery and you usually lose the water-proofing too.

Doesn't have to be that way. We've had the ability to waterproof small devices with child-replaceable battery compartments for some 40 years. Maybe more.

2
0
Kiwi
Silver badge

Ever heard the phrase "One bad apple spoils the bunch"? All those millions of working devices mean squat if you happen to draw the million-to-one that explodes and burns you.

There's a slim chance that reading a message on El Reg could trigger a stress response in your brain that could lead to a stroke or aneurysm or some other instantly fatal even. Only one in several hundred million chance maybe but that's too high a risk right?

Also one in a few thousand electronic devices suffer faults that lead to them catching fire. You should turn all electronics off just to be on the same side.

0
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: "To provide a better experience to customers"

If your car detects worn brake pads, then the maximum speed you are allowed to go should drop for safety, until you get the pads changed.

A couple of flaws in your logic - and yes, I agree that measures should be taken for many drivers to prevent them driving.

However.

You're more likely to need your brakes in an emergency in town and in traffic than you are on the roads. And you're more likely to need them because someone isn't paying attention/driving to the conditions, eg coming towards a line of stopped traffic at speed or someone going through an intersection where they didn't have the right of way. On the open road you have less such risks (though as your speed is higher if something goes wrong...) So limiting the speed below highway speeds won't necessarily help anyone.

Also, until the actual active surface is down to very close to nothing, brake pads function just as well as with new pads. It's only when the active surface is no longer covering the full width of the pad that they stop.

A lot of people who think they know what they're doing would actually try to disable a speed limiter.

What might work better for some men is a warning that makes diminishing comments about the size of their genetalia or their driving skills or something to shame them into actually doing something about getting their car serviced. Given the intelligence levels of many drivers I'm not sure even that would work.

And sadly stupid people would drive on motorways etc even if their car was limited to walking speed :( Think of what happens when someone stops or drives slowly on a high-speed section of road. (Perhaps while they're driving slow the car could also flash a big sign talking about the driving being too stupid to get their car serviced or having a small dick or something...)

But have an upvote - at least you're thinking of possible ways to help keep the roads safer and your idea may help save some lives.

0
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: Pomgolian .... Wrong... That probably explains..

if two cars cost the same... one ran like a tank but looked ugly, or a sleek model that does a better than good enough job... which do you choose?

The tank, thank you very much. I'm no snowflake to give a shit about what other snowflakes think about my car as long as it is comfy and protects me from others.

Actually, given the number of SUV's on the road, it looks like all the sissy little snowflakes are choosing "tank" rather than something else.

(I personally chose based on function - car needs to be a stationwagon or something that can tow stuff, personal transport needs to be a bike - I encourage friends to buy a decent station wagon so I have one available if I ever need the capacity and then save MY money to buy me a nice bike :) )

0
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: That probably explains..

Sony too, but at least when Sony did it, they justified this by making the phone waterproof.

That's a poor justification (for any brand, not attacking Sony here!).

I've had waterproof toys with replaceable batteries since I was a kid back in the 70s. If 1970s technology could take metal contacts through plastic or rubber (or wires for that matter) and also seal the battery compartment so the batteries should stay dry and if some tot hadn't closed the battery door properly then the insides would still stay dry, I'd think by today we could still do the same just as cheaply and easily.

You can have a feature of a "replaceable rear cover" again which the user can remove to have a battery underneath, and the battery is in a totally sealed bay. With the tiniest bit of thought you can work out how to stop water seepage reaching and shorting the battery contacts.

It's bloody simple decades-old technology that requires only seconds of thought to do. Phone companies saying "it's so we can waterproof our phones" are either showing that they lack this basic engineering skill or they're showing that they'd rather lie to the customer than give them a chance to change out batteries if they want.

(Though why you'd want to take your phone swimming with you I'll never understand. NOW GET ORF MY LORRRRN!)

3
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: "To provide a better experience to customers"

If brakes are worn they should be replaced. Many cars provide a warning light for this purpose, although many of these only operate on one wheel.

One wheel should be fine so long as it's one that has a higher level of wear (so say 2 of your pads aren't already badly worn when the light comes on).

I've seen a system which had a wire embedded in the pads, and as they wore they'd eventually break the wire, which would cause the warning light to come on. It's a fairly simple design.

3
1

TalkTalk banbans TeamTeamviewerviewer againagain

Kiwi
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Not related to NN, no matter how much you want it to be

Remind me again why an ISP shouldn't be allowed to control what goes through its network.

Because as a customer paying for an "unlimited" service, I should be able to visit legitimate firms I trade with without limits?

(yes, have used TV a lot and have previously purchased a license)

1
0

HMS Queen Elizabeth has sprung a leak and everyone's all a-tizzy

Kiwi
Silver badge
Coat

Re: God bless her...

Employ a cabin boy to stick his finger in the hole - and stop the water coming into the boat in the first place.

I thought cabin boys were for the other way round?

0
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Coat

Re: why?

Who signed off Harbour Acceptance?

Possibly... Just possibly... The leak wasn't detectable initially, but after the shaft had been going for a while the hole got a bit bigger and looser?

0
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Mushroom

Re: a leak?!

Russia is the Begbie of geopolitics, frightening but ultimately a wee man with an attitude problem.

Kinda scary how we have that with Russia, more so with the Norks, and maybe even more so with the Yanks!

"Man-made global warming" could happen a LOT faster than even the freakiest of the IPCC bods could imagine (see icon)

1
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Coat

Re: Something meaningful..

Our foes must be quaking.

Oh trust me, they are.

Of course, it's from laughter, but at least something the UK has done has them shaking in their boots!

2
0
Kiwi
Silver badge
Coat

Re: "With no planes to fly off her, we might as well sink her"?

Surely an artificial reef.

Don't think sunken aircraft carrier reefs occur naturally.

Enough defects like leaking shaft seals and they just might occur as a natural result...

(You'd need significant seal failures, all pumps out, crew not able to make a bucket line (maybe no one thought to put buckets in, modern pumps being so good'n'all), watertight doors/hatches unable to be closed (or not sealing enough), and for some reason no ability to tow her back to port - at 200L/hr it'd take a very long time to even get a noticeable lowering in the waterline!)

2
0

Ex-Microsoft intern claimed one of her fellow temps raped her. Her bosses hired him

Kiwi
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Drunken behavior is acceptable ?

As far as I know, temps get paid. I might be wrong, never had the pleasure.

So you've never worked a day in your life? Figures.

So, are you telling me, you would REALLY hire someone that gets drunk and passes out in a basement ?

Why shouldn't I hire them if they're the best candidate for the job? What they do on their own time is none of my business.

It's outside of work hours, not on work premises, how is it any of my business unless they're showing up to work drunk? If they're showing up drunk they get sent away to sober up and when they get back they get spoken too and if necessary a verbal warning. Then another verbal, then 1st and 2nd written warnings, then counselling.... Eventually they get fired if they make a habit of it. Unless they actually (not "possibly" or "might have done") put someone at risk, in which case it can be straight to written warning time.

Nothing in the article suggests it was a regular thing, so no reason for the boss to take an interest in it.

As for the guy, yeah, he is what they call, collateral damage

No, the children of the company's owner are "collateral damage". If someone was to be fired or could prove they were not hired for the reasons you give, in many places around the world they'd be able to take you to court for illegal discrimination among other things. If your company is small enough to not be able to pay the fines or awarded damages, you're out of a job - and quite rightly so.

If he was to be fired on the basis of an unfounded accusation, he would've been able to take MS to court and, being in the US, could've been awarded a great many millions.

I'm guessing you're going to be "programmer for hire" for a very long time. As much as I dislike alcohol I'd happily hire someone who can get the job done. Your attitude towards other people's private lives, however, would be a significant ongoing disruption to the rest of the workforce and no matter how good a programmer you are, you'd be stopping others doing their jobs, clearly show an inability to be part of a "team" and leave your personal views where they belong (or handle them in an adult manner) - you I would never hire on the basis you would not fit in with the rest of the employees and would make their lives a misery.

1
1
Kiwi
Silver badge

Re: Kristian Walsh I don't know...

He was accused, not convicted, and yes the alleged victim also could have been lying (statistically, though that is just as unlikely as a report of him stealing from her being a lie).

I think you'll find that statistically people exaggerate wrong done to them quite a lot. You'll probably also find that there are a high number of men accused of raping women where the evidence including DNA just doesn't stack up. Sadly, often the police seem to work on the view of "he was accused therefore he is guilty" and take efforts to make sure they're convicted, even to the point of "there's no DNA evidence nor physical evidence of any penetration let alone forced" being hidden from the defence/jury. Some of that (maybe the majority) is from the fear of accusing a victim of lying and being found that the victim was telling the truth.

People lie against their enemies all the time. It's human nature.

Would you have dealt with it this way if the two interns were your direct reports?

I would've independently spoken to each, given them an opportunity to move to another department or an offer of one taking leave while it was investigated. If neither wanted to move I would not have forced them to unless the issue was impacting others.

However, leaving two employees together who are in such serious conflict with each other is disgraceful behaviour towards whichever of them is the wronged party.

I expect/assume they were both given the chance to move. Neither of them felt strongly enough about it. That is quite strong evidence that she was lying, she did not feel threatened enough to want to work in another department and her story wasn't credible enough to force him to move even as a precaution.

In other companies, people can be given a choice if the firm is large enough, and they can take it upon themselves to get a job elsewhere or just plain quit if the firm isn't large enough to have other departments, Often in a conflict there are two sides, and the "wronged" side may have mental issues that cloud their judgement - I have a friend whose neighbour has been accusing him of harassing her among other things. His "harassment" initially consisted of a friendly greeting whenever they were in speaking distance, but now simply consists of if she's outside checking her mail box when he's going to work then he's picking that time to travel just because he knows it upsets her - not because he's had an 8:30am start for the past 5 years. To take your line, he should move out of his home because she felt wrong, and maybe the thing that got her upset really happened.

Adults should be able to sort their differences out. If they can't, they should be able to put them aside enough to work together. In a case of rape then while police are investigating there should be some grounds given (even perhaps letting one take time off on full pay should they choose) for one party to leave, but you simply cannot force an accused person to do something without a very good reason; it's both immoral, abusive, and in many jurisdictions plain illegal. If the accuser doesn't want to move or take a break, that suggests that his/her feelings in the matter aren't that strong.

I've worked in places where people hated each other passionately, and if they ever met in the street after work you could expect one of them would be dying. But they were professional enough to put their differences aside enough to get their jobs done and to not let their personal bitter hatred of each other (actually IIRC it was just one hater, one upset because they could never find out what the problem was) affect performance. That's what adults do.

If both want to stay, and it's not having a significant impact on the rest of the staff or the company as a whole, then leaving them together is the right thing to do.

Her complaint was about how badly her employer has handled the situation.

I read the article with that bit of joy at the sort of hate I could lump on MS because of how badly they'd done things. I see instead that they appeared to have acted in the right manner. The article was disappointing because I could not use it to further justify my dislike of (almost) all things MS. Instead I was in a position to bite back some of my hatred and acknowledge their apparent ability to actually get things right from time to time.

The strong correlation between those commenters standing up to defend Microsoft for this idiocy and those commenters who normally despise Microsoft and all its works was amusing.

It's weird that you see my defending MS for doing the right thing in this case and giving them shit for doing the wrong thing in other cases is something strange to you. Are you not familiar with the concepts of "credit where credit is due"? When your children do the right thing, do you punish them because in the past they've done wrong and you must treat them in a consistent manner? If a friend wrongs you today, but is friendly towards you tomorrow (and perhaps they believed the "wrong" you felt was actually the right thing), do you treat them as if they're still doing bad things to you?

Deal with situations and people on their merits, not on what happened in a completely different situation.

And perhaps that even their most passionate haters (I think I saw even BB give them credit for how they managed this!) are saying they got this right should tell you something about whether or not MS did the right thing.

0
0
Kiwi
Silver badge

Re: Drunken behavior is acceptable ?

On the grounds that they are alcoholics and try to involve the company in the next media scandal. You can find reasons if you want to fire someone

On those grounds they'd sue you for discrimination. Have you not noticed the number of media scandals coming from MS in recent years? And given some of the decisions made, SN is probably doing a LOT worse than alcohol at times! What of Ballmer's rants, throwing stuff around the office, throwing chairs at people (some would call that an "attempted assault with a deadly weapon" (I call it "someone with anger and impulse issues had a tanty")) and so on?

Although your next post does make the point that they're temps - they're interns so not sure if there's much difference or not (a horrible system, a year's work from someone without paying them a cent? Talk about "land of the free! - not so much "One nation under God" because He says "Don't muzzle an ox while it's treading out the grain") - but if they were real workers then firing them for something done out of hours and off the premises is pretty hard to get away with in countries with strong labour laws. Also... I don't think there was anything to say the guy himself was drunk, so you'd be paying for his great-grandkids' college fund AND be working for him by the time he's done suing.

0
0

Sigh. It's not quite Star Trek's Data, but it'll do: AI helps boffins clock second Solar System

Kiwi
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: Same number of planets?

Fine, but does it have the same number of commentards? I bet we've got more trolls. And BETTER trolls, come to that. Terra 4 life!

And the BIGLIEST and ORANGELIEST trolls to boot! :)

0
0

No hack needed: Anonymisation beaten with a dash of SQL

Kiwi
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: It's one thing to make a law...

Wouldn't that mean cavemen were all geniuses?

Given the lack of "sum total of human knowldge" at that point, and that they managed to even survive against the elements and the environment, I'd say they were pretty smart!

The information one has available does not show one's intellect, it's how one creates new information or fills in the gaps in their knowledge that shows.

With the knowledge resources you have today, if placed in their environment, could you feed, clothe and shelter yourself? Could you make tools to hunt with? Could you make a stone blade to help cut fibre?

And even if you can, how many university-educated people today could manage it?

I'm not so sure their intellect was as limited as many make out. Total knowledge sure, but intellect?

4
0

New battery boffinry could 'triple range' of electric vehicles

Kiwi
Silver badge
Pint

Re: No one will notice

We complain about range, but we only need to go as far as our bladders can take us before we need to get out and micturate.

One of my bikes could manage 330km. I could do that in a single sitting, which would be around 3.5hrs. Of course, if I'd been drinking a lot of coffee in the hours before departure, that might be closer to 5 hours with lots of stops (1n those days I wondered about the virtues of installing a bit of pipe, but worried that I might "have an accident" should I have an accident and need to depart from the bike quickly).

When I had the money I'd be away at least one weekend of any 4, with a minimum distance-from-home of 200km. Often I went to a place closer to 300km away. 300/60=5, but we'll say 4 since I was there overnight (so 60k then stop, to 120 then stop, then 180, 240 and finally my destination at 300, meaning a charge at 60,120, 180 and 240.) 4 charges at what, 6 hours per charge? There's a full day of my weekend gone just getting there, another full day getting back, and we still haven't taken care of the overnight charge.

Of course, most cars could probably easily be replaced by public transport (cue downvotes) with a bit of sharing between mates on shopping day, and a hire car (or public transport again) for those times you're getting away for a few days. Not many people actually use their cars for getting away from home for a while even once a year, so yes for them the charging issue is well and truly solved if they can take the car from home to work and have enough to get home again OR have a place to charge while there. But if your commute is greater than half the range of your car and you have to use public parking during the day, and there's no charging stations nearby.....

A 200k range should end most arguments though.

0
0

Engineer named Jason told to re-write the calendar

Kiwi
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Can't we get rid of May?

Getting back into the EU, let alone on the terms we (currently) have is improbable in the extreme.

Good point - though it may lend some weight to the leavers' claims of corruption etc within the EU :)

I reckon the Leave voters will be the ones hit hardest. Serves 'em right.

It is oft' said that the people get the government they deserve....

0
0

The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing