Electronics? Really? Those are just things. They can be replaced. My data is backed up and can be restored. The things to worry about are food, medical supplies, and water. We always have about a month's worth of food and water stored away in the event of some sort of disaster. I don't give a fuck about my electronic devices. I care about the life and well being of myself and my wife, and like I said data can be restored.

I somewhat agree, but it could help tell us where to focus other search efforts.

It is, actually. You don't often see such an efficiently self-demonstrating explanation. ;)

Trying to tell other people they are wrong all the time is a liability. Telling people, "I am smarter than you, so you are wrong" is a liability [...] If you're so smart, you should have figured this out by now.

You literally just did this with your own post. You told the parent he was wrong, and then implied it was because he wasn't smart enough.

He should have held on to the domain name. He may have been obigated to shut the site down, but nothing requires him to give the name over to them.

It appears there was some negotiation over the shutdown and perhaps giving up the domain name was done in order to secure the user database:

With the user database secured, an agreement was quickly reached to close down the site and transfer the domain.

I should also point out that tax revenues per head are only higher in Scotland if oil and gas revenues are included in the calculations. Otherwise, they are broadly similar to UK average.

Even if oil and gas are included, spending per head in Scotland is approximately 1,400 more than UK average, while revenues are about 1,700 more than UK average -- really quite a small difference.

Half of your argument is missing. You need the revenues collected information ("taxes per head"). If you get that and do the math, then you've got something.

Really? That's all you have? Not even a citation to prove a point?

The GGP claimed 2 things (1: more taxes per head, 2: less spending per head). I showed that the second was false. The other claim (greater taxes per head), I left alone. There is no math involved.

We've actually paid more tax per head, and received less back per head, than England for every one of the last 110 years,

Oh, really? Because Wikipedia doesn't agree with you. Spending per person:

The persistence of per capita public expenditure lower in England than elsewhere continues to attract calls for the formula to be renegotiated. Using figures for the financial year 2006/2007,[4] if a UK-wide per capita average were a notional 100%, identifiable per capita expenditure on services in England would be 97%, in Scotland 117%, in Wales 111% and in Northern Ireland 127% (this does not take account of non-identifiable expenditure, such as defence and debt interest, which are deemed to be for the benefit of the entire UK, regardless as to where the money is actually spent). In cash, this would work out as (per person):[5]

England £7,121

Scotland £8,623

You are attempting to compare very different things which either indicates a lack of understanding or a pretended one in some sort of attempt to decieve the gullible for political purposes.
I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt but your frequent earlier posts on this topic over the last few months indicate you are using pretended good old homespun stupidity as a vector to puch political propaganda - plus it's directly out of the fucking playbook.
If you are not being paid to push the view but are merely a cheerleader willing to trash their reputation to yell for the team I suppose not all of the stupidity is pretended.

Your analogy of comparing science to religion doesn't fit as you would realise if you thought about it instead of just regurgitating Ian Plimer's stupid recycled anti-creationist rant that he warmed up to re-use against climate scientists.

DLL hell to start with (now finally going away), but the MS platforms have changed so much that given enough time something outside of your application is going to break it as the next fad emerges and the old one is dropped. Packaging as much in as possible and pretending you are developing for a fairly dumb console with hardly anything available instead of relying on what's currently on top of the quicksand is a partial workaround. Developing for an environment that MS does not have control over which sits on top of the OS is a better workaround.

With that said, I think governments should use open standards for data, document storage and interfaces where available, and avoid products (proprietary or otherwise) that do not support such standards.

As long as the products really do support the standard and the standard doesn't allow blobs of proprietary data formats.

OK, I'll bite. :)

In a Perfect World, tabs would indeed be superior to spaces. No question.

But in the Real World, tabs and spaces inevitably get mixed together as multiple people touch a project, and then indentation gets messed up.

Standardizing on spaces helps mitigate this, as everyone sees the exact same thing regardless of editor (whereas tab spacing typically depends on local editor settings). And any editor should be able to "use spaces for tabs" so there is no actual impact on developer effort.

Which means when you get a kernel update things stop working until you fiddle with the drivers.

No, what it means is that you completely failed to understand what the KMOD drivers and DKMS do.

In the case of the former, they ensure that the drivers work over multiple kernel revisions and in the case of the latter, the kernel modules are automatically re-built on boot up.

In neither case do "things stop working".

I think it was just a few years ago that they stopped reimbursing, saying that home Internet is now normal, and the VPN use doesn't increase the cost.

Since the Appeals court decided that plans with unlimited minutes and text were not a barrier to employers being held responsible for a portion of cellphone fees, the ruling could also apply to home Internet connections.