Posts by Cari 148 publicly visible posts • joined 11 Jan 2012
No!
Women in the tech industry have every other day of the year to raise awareness for the issues we still have there.
It's not even been a day that the LGBT community have had an historic win for their US number, and already women are crapping all over that and the public celebration to draw attention back to "our plight"? Ugh!
@Spleen - you say "both willing to learn" but follow it up with an example where B is the only one in expected to learn anything. Not really applicable to this, since *both* sides believe themselves to be 100% right, and trust wholeheartedly what they've been told by people they believe have the right answers, despite none of the arseholes involved having time machines.
Science, archaeology, paleontology etc. don't know all the answers, the hows, and the whys *yet*, and what they do know is always being updated. Pooh-poohing ideas (however ridiculous sounding) because they don't line up with your beliefs, instead of investigating and debunking, doesn't help progress. And through questioning, debunking, investigating, we are constantly learning and updating our knowledge of this planet's history, correcting inaccurate or just plain wrong explanations of both the religious AND the scientists.
*That* is where the value in discourse with people we believe to be totally wrong, is. Who ever thinks hard about what they know and how, when ensconced in their echochamber where their own knowledge and they of the world remains unchallenged?
"Honestly I didn't see much in the way of anti-English sentiment amongst the pro-Independence crowd"
The vocal minority were busy directing all that venom at the "No" voters. At least, from this outsider's observations.
Dislike for how Westminster runs things is pretty much it when it comes to independence, more devolution or any devolution at all.
Though wrt English upset at anti-English sentiments, you have the small minority of colonialist knobs in your midst to thank for that. Sorry to say.
"If both Scotland and north ireland go, there's nothing preventing first the welsh and later the north of england to begin clamouring for more 'devolution'."
Gosh yes, we wouldn't want those uppity Welsh getting more control over what happens to and in their country, when Westminster already has their best interests at heart.
So long as we don't need to be subsidised by the rest of the UK disproportionately to our own contributions, what's the problem? Ditto Cornwall & North England to be honest.
"Personally I would like to option to take my £150 and spend it elsewhere."
You can: Netflix, Prime, youtube, catch-up services, there's the cinema and DvD release dates not too far behind that... All you need is the Internet for most of it. So long as you're not watching live broadcast on TV, PC with an adapter, or the Internet, you don't need a license.
" If they were lefties they would have been covering the london protests on Downing street as it happened rather than tucking it into the news in the middle of the night."
Or, like the rest of the left-wing media, they are rightfully ashamed of the part they played in causing the riots in the first place, after realising that vandalising a women in WWII war memorial on VE day in a spoilt temper tantrum, is not going to endear the rest of the public to the left any time soon.
"Thats a stupid argument. You might as well say its unfair that someone on the breadline has to pay the same for their groceries as a millionaire."
That isn't comparable. There is a range of supermarkets, grocery stores and what have you, suitable for a range of incomes. Someone on the breadline has cheaper alternatives than shopping at Waitrose or M&S.
With some exceptions, everyone pays the same fee for TV license, and it is required if you want to watch live broadcast. Extras, like Sky et al are not required, so if you can't afford it you can easily go without.
If the Beeb could actually be impartial, and were accountable when their shoddy and weaselly reporting harms your average citizen that can't afford to take them to court, I'd actually have no problem with them or the license (aside from they way the enforce and collect it). As it stands though, they're near the top of my shitlist.
It's really a tax on watching live broadcast, doesn't matter if that's with a TV or some other means.
If you have a TV, but only use it to watch the various channels' catch-up or on demand services, to play videos/ DvDs and games etc. but do not watch anything that comes in via Freeview (and you don't have Sky or Virgin), and do not watch the live broadcasts the BBC have on their site (like sports), you don't need a license. You just need to tell TV licensing you don't watch or record live broadcast (http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/how-to-tell-us-you-dont-watch-tv-top12). And maybe let one of them have a nose around your house to make sure you're not lying...
It doesn't seem like you would be saving a lot, but for people that don't watch live broadcast and don't have a great income, it could be handy to know. A ~tenner a month can make a difference to some.
It could be an outlier, or maybe they took into consideration the same factors the bookies did when working out the odds.
From what I could see leading up to the election, the only places that were so wrong about predictions, were the left-wing media, its readers, and the polls.
I would propose it's more growing up while Labour are in power, and finding when you leave school or university your future prospects are far bleaker than the generations that voted them (Labour) in.
I was in highschool for the '97 election, and been a graduate for 2 years by the '10 election. Even before I was old enough to vote, it was obvious that Labour (or " New Labour") did not have the workers' and lower classes' best interests at heart, and they were only getting in because of the generations of voters that are stuck in the glory days, or who have indoctrinated younger generations into believing the glory days of Labour are still here.
Pen-y-gors: Thumbs up for beautifully capturing and expressing the authoritarian mindset of an "anti-Tory". You are so convincing!
I'll have to give you a B grade though, for implying your opinion is wrong some of the time. That little slip in arrogance kinda gave the game away.
Perhaps the pollsters would get more accurate results if they also took into consideration the number of people who lie and say they voted, or will vote, Labour?
The animosity towards the Conservatives and their supporters and voters, particularly from left/ liberal media and the left-wing - particularly Labour voters - is more than strong enough to keep not only Conservative voters silenced until it's all over, but anyone else not voting in line with the Labour hive-mind. Live in a staunchly Labour area but voting Green or Lib Dems? Better keep quiet else you'll have to listen to some over-zealous Labour supporter (the kind with at least four "Vote Labour" signs in their front garden and windows) berate you over how you're voting the wrong way and may as well not vote at all, for all the good it will do.
I've seen so much unwarranted hate and vitriol these last few weeks, coming almost exclusively from very vocal Labour supporters. If the pollsters actually watched the electorate when they engage publicly, and if the left stepped out of their media echochamber, perhaps they'd be as surprised about the results as the bookies and the rest of us, which is to say "not at all"
I feel bad for all the Labour supporters that treat their opposition like human beings, because the small minority in their number are really doing them all a disservice.
It's a touch worse than that. One third of the electorate didn't vote (unknown is how many did so in protest, and how many just didn't care either way). One third of the votes went to the Conservatives, but that actually translates to around one quarter of the electorate. Using the numbers the Beeb have for results, something like at least 13-14 million voted for some kind of liberal/ left party. Again, ~one third of the electorate. Then there was everyone else who voted for someone other than conservative, and the small number of ballot spoilers.
We have a system where 75% of the electorate didn't vote for the party that got into power, and blaming the 25% that did vote for them, when it's the system that is bollocks.
"That doesn't explain..."
That's because they all have audiences to pander to, audiences of people seeking to have their views and beliefs validated.
You're not going to get decent reporting when publication of choice gets most of its income from outrage porn, poorly researched articles that confirm the biases of its readership, and frequently slings mud at the other team. Even less so when the people in the publication's employ also try to use their position as a platform for their ideologies and step away from writing in the public interest.
Good grief, I imagine the majority of posters here and over on the thread, are actually old enough to have children that are old enough to have children by now.
It isn't about not wanting to play with other people, it's about having a modern update of a classic game without all the anti-consumer baggage modern games come with (like DRM in the form of always online play, or a game that is only playable for as long as the servers are running).
I was there playing D3 near release and Blizzard still hadn't ironed out the kinks with the connections to their servers. There was no need for it to be always online for solo mode, but there was no way to actually play the game without logging in and connecting to the battle.net servers. And then there were the account compromise issues that followed, where people were having their characters items stolen - even if they only played solo.
30 years on, and I can still play the original Elite on my beeb micro. Will I be saying the same of Elite: Dangerous in 30 years time?
Who's pressuring them to get the game out on time though? Looking at the responses, I can imagine that people who wanted offline play would be more than happy for them to delay release so it can be properly implemented. Instead they're losing sales... it's puzzling.
"Your comments confirm *misogynist*"<<<< stopped reading here.
Stop abusing and misusing this word. It *really* doesn't mean what you think it means.
A misogynist is someone who hates *all* women. Who treats them like crap, and will use them for sex and whatever else they can get out of them. Someone who thinks of women as lesser beings. Who will use women to get back at other men to prove their dominance over "weaker" men. Who will hit, beat, rape, manipulate, threaten to kill if not *actually* kill their female partner when they feel their woman has stepped out of line.
They treat women like their servants, expecting women to run around on them every hour of the day, every day of the week and still give it up whenever it's demanded (it being sex btw). Misogynists don't hold many men in high regard either, calling them "pussies" for actually being respectful human beings, and determine a man's worth on how successful he is in life with women. They don't have empathy for women. They refer to them as "sluts" or "slags", and boy can a misogynist not stand a woman with a sexual history (although he will expect her to perform like a pro in the bedroom).
They cannot *stand* the idea of *their woman* being with another man, and will shame and bully their woman out of looking anywhere but the floor when around other men. Their woman isn't allowed to talk about sex in the company of others, and they absolutely loathe the idea of their woman being seen as sexual by any other man. Ironically, that doesn't stop the misogynist from bragging to "the lads" about their sexual exploits (gotta make sure everyone knows how "alpha" he is, ofc).
Misogynists see women as property, as trophies to be won to show their superior status, as slaves to do their bidding and to clean up after them, to be discarded once they're no longer of use. They don't respect women in positions of authority, they can't stand the idea of a woman being more intelligent than them, and they really, /really/ hate when a woman has to bail them out of financial messes, especially if *their* woman is earning more than them.
Know what's great about misogynists though? They tell you who they are. They will be more than forthcoming with how badly they've treated women in the past (be they partners, friends, colleagues or family), and will happily tell you how you're the only woman ever they have had any respect for (but ofc. this is a lie). They will openly show a lack of respect for other women when in your company, and make sure to point out to you all the ways women behave that are undesirable to them.
Actual misogynists don't simply wear a shirt (made by their female friend) with pretty women showing *gasp* a bit of shoulder (what is this, the Victorian age?) and get on with their life treating them like human beings of equal standing.
Get some perspective!
I have never, in all my life and experience met a man working in IT, or in the geek community that is anything remotely resembling a misogynist. They're either too busy getting on with what interests them to give a crap about the gender of the person they're working or socialising with, or have been beaten and bullied into putting women on a pedestal by benevolent sexists abusing words like "misogyny" and shaming them for the tiniest of things (like wearing a shirt with pretty ladies on).
I have known one actual misogynist in my life (and, being in IT and geeky circles since high school, I've known a lot of men), and that was my abusive, non-geeky, non-techy ex. And in work, the /sexists/ were the few dude-bro types that had to talk about sex all the time to make sure everyone knew they were men, and manly men at that.
This man should not have been bullied and harassed like he has been. He certainly shouldn't have had to apologise, and cry while doing so. He should have been celebrating the achievements of im and his colleagues, and instead of talking about his damn shirt, the media should be abuzz with how awesome it is they landed a prove on a freaking comet!
eta. and in the event I'm responding to a satirical post, well consider this a comment to anyone that actually *does* believe the man's shirt was misogynist.
Gutted doesn't even come close :( I use VLC to watch videos but WinAMP's been my music player of choice since my family got a PC with an Internet connection. Satan will be skating to work before I use some shit like iTunes and I'm far too lazy to try and get last.fm working with something that isn't the big three - it works with my phone and my PC thanks to WinAMP!
I was trying to remember what it was that got me hooked on it too and totally forgot about all the visual customisation you could have! I just use the large Bento skin and listen to my own music collection now but it was the skins and SHOUTcast that drew me in.
Your experiences would suggest perhaps we need a change in perception of IT people. I mean, how many of us in the field honestly want to have to fit the (often negative) stereotype of IT Guy in order for customers to believe we actually know what we're on about?
Perhaps you should try wearing skirts. I find they afford greater freedom of movement when crawling under desks. Modesty is maintained if you wear thick, dark tights with them also.
I would note though, at least in my job crawling under desks is a small part of it, so I dress sensible but presentable over stereotypical "IT Guy" and found I leave a better impression than my male colleagues.
"Still, I have no illusions about what Facebook might have on me"
I found out a few years back a little of what Facebook like to keep after you "delete" it.
I changed the e-mail address of my main account 3 years ago, and blocked and deleted a load of "friends" in the process. I have re-used that e-mail address for a couple of test accounts since, and each time Facebook would recommend I add all the people I deleted. More recently, it's started recommending I add people I work with (that are not friends with my main account). From what I can tell, even if you delete information like your contact details and who you want to be friends with, Facebook still keep a record behind the scenes.
Odlly enough, for all they go on about people having multiple accounts and how awful it is, they clearly know I have more than one and haven't auto-closed it or even given me a warning...
We have problems with it needing restarts or crashing with some of the more heavy duty users where I work. From what I've been told it largely seems to be down to lack of space allocated to them and Outlook trying to archive vast amounts of mail to their storage over the network, rather than to the local machine.
I'm a light user of Outlook, receive little mail, delete the crap fairly regularly and don't experience problems unless there's actually something wrong with our network.
AC isn't contesting what car park the Prankster stayed in, just the spurious information about him buying two tickets. You also get slapped with parking charge tickets when overstaying your welcome in free car parks (since they often have time limits to stop people taking the piss).
@Trevor_Pott - you can blame patriarchy for that, not feminism. Feminism doesn't want women being lumped with the title of "only person fit to look after kids" (which has negative effects on women long term financially and career-wise, men who are the better choice for main parent in separation cases and of course the kids who end stuck with unfit mothers), and it certainly isn't responsible for centuries (millennia?) of social conditioning that has been telling us women are delicate little flowers who must be protected. Feminism is about equality and equal opportunity. It is not what is responsible for all the stupid gender roles our societies have been built on.
I've found similar when ditching an e-mail address for my main account and using it for a second throwaway one.
I'd used this e-mail address on my main one for a few years then deleted and blocked a load of people and eventually changed my e-mail address. Half a year later I re-use my original address for a new account and started getting friend suggestions for all the people I used to be friends with, even those I'd blocked them when it was on my old account.
Amen. I'll never stop being bitter about the one A-Level IT Module the teacher gave me and a load of friends 100% in, that came back at the end of the two years from the examiners, all marked down to 60%, with no explanation from the teacher or exam board. It was a web design module, and we'd all gone above and beyond the scope of the module since we all had an interest and actually knew HTML etc. (rather than frontpage/publisher). That isn't to say we didn't do the boring bits to tick the modules boxes too.. we did, which was all the more frustrating.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
