
Huguenot
Member-
Posts
7,746 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Blogs
FAQ
Tradespeople Directory
Jobs Board
Store
Everything posted by Huguenot
-
Well Charlotte W, I barely need to go beyond your first couple of sentences before you present two highly conflicting complaints that 'people and government are borrowing too much' but 'banks aren't lending enough'. Well which way do you want it? More debt or less debt? I'm going to go with your first statement, and assume that you don't want people borrowing too much - but then you ask Warren Buffet what the best way is to invest ?1bn is (which means lending it to someone else and therefore creating debt). You then want to spend the interest - which is the money people have to pay you to be in your debt, so it simply makes debt worse. The rest of your list is exactly what the government is trying to do, they just don't have enough money. So the interest you make on your ?1bn is not going to come close to the ?700bn they are already spending every year on what you regard to be simply not enough. The only way they could spend more is by... BORROWING it! So yes, at the root of all your philosophy is a compete confusion between disapproving of debt and borrowing to excess, and a desire to make more people suffer more debt and spend money they don't have to do more things they can't afford.
-
Firstly check what happens if you change the settings sound output to various other devices. It sounds like you use HDMI sometimes, but not all the time. Some applications on my own laptop (principally browsers) have always been a pain in the arse when changing outputs. I sometimes need to restart applications after changing output devices to swap between HDMI and headphones for example. In the worst scenario, I'm afraid your HDMI card and your normal sound card for speakers/headphones are very likely to be different hardware. This means it is indeed possible to fry your normal sound card with HDMI sound still working.
-
Hi Sue, I don't believe that you're changing the frequency when you change those jumpers, I believe you are changing the RF code (or 'tag') of the transmitter. It will always operate at 868MHz. Unless the transmitted code matches the receiver code, your thermostat will ignore the message. Hence change the code, and so long as your transmitter and receiver match, it will simply be a case of trial and error to find out which one is least likely to suffer from interference from others nearby. FYI, the most likely interference is from another thermostat (they can transmit over 60m), and then possibly from a poorly calibrated cellphone. Either way, changing the identity code on both transmitter and receiver to a different match should fix it.
-
Probably as many as there were 'British' - i.e. none. There were plenty of Angles from Northern Germany and Saxons from Central Germany, who famously lost out in central governance to the Normans from Scandinavia via France after they trounced the Danish King of the middle marches somewhere near Hastings.
-
Did someone just suggest the nurse was executed by the royal family? Chem trails I tell you.
-
You don't need a gadget. Just find the view on Google Streetview that you are unhappy with and click the 'report' button. They will blur it.
-
419 scams are just as illegal, but just as difficult to nail down. In the end you can only control something within your jurisdiction. This one is fiendish, presenting itself as buying and selling ad space - which it does - but then autodebiting your credit card every month to continually top up your account and ensure you hit your 'cap' requirements. It has a full range of fake 'strategies' that 'experienced' players employ to get rich, implying that if you fail you need to spend more money to learn more... You are expected to 'sponsor' new players, and pressure is imposed to bring in family and friends.
-
No, lowlander, that's just not reasonable. This is an unfortunate tragedy, but nowhere near grounds for a unilateral and poorly informed attack on the hospital. You have no idea of their training regime. I don't know if you've ever been involved with training, or large public facing institutions, but training people doesn't make people do the right things all the time. People just make mistakes. I'm not sure what the hypothetical story about teenagers is trying to prove?
-
Well yes Penguin68, but I'm not sure. I don't think they are either, that's why their website is written in broken English, claiming to be a Canadian entity, but with a URL registered to a Las Vegas hotel suite and have training videos in Polish. There'll never be a verdict in a British court.
-
It's all for the greater good you know rd. Greater love hath no man than this etc. :D
-
As LM says, the culpability of the DJs regarding the death will rest upon whether they could reasonably foresee their prank leading to the suicide. I think a prosecution service would think not, and so it probably wouldn't get to trial. If they did put it to trial, I can't believe a jury would get the require majority to find them guilty. However, it does mean that now a suicide HAS taken place, that any future prankster would have been able to foresee that consequence of the gag, and hence would have a much greater chance of being found guilty. Regarding the acquisition of information by deception, seems likely they'll get the book thrown at them for that, but it's unlikely to be a very heavy book, and the station legal counsel will carry the can.
-
It's a scam. The 'value' of your advertising inventory only goes up because other brokers come in and buy it in order to sell to other brokers who buy it in order to sell to other brokers. There is no money entering this system from advertising because it's too expensive. When the brokers stop joining, the new money coming in stops, the value collapses and all the money disappears. I've been in senior roles in the digital media industry for more than 10 years, so I hope that gives me sufficient credibility? In detail, the advertising business relies upon an exchange of value between a publisher (providing access to a customer) and an advertiser (who will allocate part of the value of a sale as a 'fee' to the publisher for providing them). For example, when you buy an air ticket for ?150, this won't just be the cost of flying you to your destination, but also the cost of advertising to you, and administrating the ticket. A typical 'cost per acquisition' of an airline ticket in the UK might be ?25 for each ?150 ticket sold. This is what they can spend on advertising. However that ?25 can't be given out in one chunk, because the advertising is often seen by people who don't click, and the people that click don't always reserve a ticket, and the people that reserve a ticket don't always finish the transaction. When the maths is all done, this means that the 'value' of online advertising is defined by the economics of the whole chain. Typically this means that an advertiser might be able to pay approximately, for example, 50p per thousand viewings. They might pay more for 'famous' sites that build their brand, but it means that they've got to pay even less for the shitty sites. The problem is that this banners broker system starts pricing at ?15 per thousand including all the fees, and most of the sites are compete and utter rubbish. So in this banners broker system, the value is set by selling your 'packages' to brokers who then sell it to other brokers. The price is already more than an advertiser will pay for it. Hence there is no value in the system - only the desperate need for new brokers to keep coming in to feed early investors.
-
I can see a correlation between crime and attitude - there seems to be a long term correlation between rising crime during individualist right leaning governments, and reducing crime under socialist left leaning governments. This is quite at odds with right wing claims to be 'tough on crime' - historically their attitude seems to drive crime, not reduce it.
-
Very probably ;) I believe the questions was 'why would people do this' to which I responded 'it's an attribute of young urban males'. You disagreed, saying 'it's the wealth divide envy' which is a reference to modern left wing thinking regarding the widening gap between rich and poor. I merely pointed out that this type of vandalism has always been around so your argument didn't hold water.
-
Yeah, I know what you mean, one way of describing them might be 'The British Tea Party'. They campaigned aggressively against anti-apartheid measures, although this may have been because they thought that this restricted Britsh people's freedom (conveniently overlooking that apartheid restricted African people's freedom). Many of their members are also members of UKIP, who largely seem to believe that 'The World Should Be Run By Old Priveleged White British Men'. Sir Patrick was associated with the team, as was Norris McWhirter. However, Sir Patrick was notoriously against fox hunting, and also supported Monster Raving Loony. He was against excessive immigration, but was also against the persecution of minorities. It would be safer to say that he was a hotch-potch of 'empire' views but they hardly constituted an oppressive right winger.
-
Well LadyD, the obvious answer is that if people don't report those things in 2012, they didn't report them in 1982 either, so your point is largely irrelevant. The frame of reference is the same for both years. As it happens, I was actually using the British Crime Survey (from 1981 annually) as my comparison, as it uses both reported and unreported crime identified by survey, so that gives you a clearer picture. But more importantly if you reject any supporting data that doesn't reinforce your position, then really you're just expressing a prejudice, rather than an informed argument.
-
That is also an excellent tune - but not really 70s or 80s motorsport material. :D
-
Well before the nurse's death the only thing you could say was 'it's not very nice and one of these days it could go wrong' - which isn't exactly front page news. After this tragedy, it spurs people to recognise otherwise ill-defined anxieties that were actually rooted in a real threat.
-
I think the measure of 'negligence' involved in a prank call would be calculated according to that which a 'reasonable person' might have been able to predict. Probably the only thing that a reasonable person would have been able to predict about this would be that the recipients of the call would be publically humiliated, but not that it would result in suicide. In that sense the DJs could only be called to task for the malign desire to publically humiliate members of the nursing profession for other people's entertainment. However, I totally agree with MM and MP's view that it would be extraordinary to claim that this incident was anything but the 'fault' of the pranksters. If you play on railway lines sooner or later you'll get hit by a train, and it isn't the train's fault. These pranksters were playing with fire once they thought it was fun to destroy people's confidence and sense of pride just for a laugh. I just don't get 'pranks'. I received one myself at a well known media company. I wasn't in the least angry about it (and use it as a case study at conferences) but I don't really understand why a complete stranger who knows nothing about myself or my hardworking colleagues would go out of their way to make us look stupid.
-
Except that your argument isn't supported by any of the data, which puts the numbers of of crime in society either the same or less than it was 30 years ago. Since the population was 56m then, compared with 62m now, and the 'wealth divide' is greater now than it's ever been, that means that the only correlation you could draw is that 'wealth divide envy' is reducing crime, not increasing it. That would clearly be a ridiculous conclusion for me to draw - so the only conclusion you can draw is that there is no connection between 'wealth divide envy' and crime.
-
Not sure what their religion has got to do with this?
-
Young adult males don't require anything so complex as 'wealth divide envy' to be socially destructive. The only thing we do when we trot out these platitudes is give them some self-justification that they rehearse to sucker TV journalists when they loot suburban sportswear stores. If left to their own devices young adult males will form loose but highly competitive social hierarchies where status is established by physical prowess, domination rituals and acts of casual violence. If we want to address this we need to provide a better sense of direction, a sense of discipline, a development path and support that would require substantial social investment that we are loth to do. 'Wealth divide envy' has no bearing in this.
-
Interesting idea, it seems inherently plausible - is this just your view or was this part of other research?
-
No, my point isn't that these cuts can't be made - it's that the vast majority of work these institutions do is vital, not headline grabbing whacky fringe theatre stuff. Where cuts can be made to projects like that, the impact on overall government expenditure will be insignificant. This is like Romney taking the knife to Big Bird. Tory election promises of 'cutting the quangos' had no meaningful impact on expenditure either - they're just silly ploys to grab headlines and infuriate conservatives. To rework government expenditure in any meaningful way it's only to be done through tackling the sacred cows: health, welfare, education and pensions.
East Dulwich Forum
Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.