He states, based on a single "URL checker" from O2, that every website he tried to check including slashdot, other tech news/resources sites and his own blog are "blocked by a parental controls regime - according to the URL checker".

But a little testing would have shown him that disney.com is blocked on this. As is www.gov.uk - the UK governments own official site. The parental controls he's ranting about are bunkum. He should have researched his subject, and posted from an informed viewpoint, instead this article is a waste of time.

That's what is missing from these algorithms. What about those who are attracted by some other factor than physical appearance?

They are a small outlier that it makes commercial sense to ignore them.

How is this modded interesting?

It a currency is not scarce, it is not valuable.

All the lies and deceit that has come along from them so far means that WE. DO. NOT. TRUST. WHAT. YOU. SAY.

Your words are pointless, because you are almost certainly lying. "How do you know when an NSA spokesman is lying?" "His lips are moving"

Alligators

That is absolutely absurd.

For example when you talk about "they" who do you mean? All of them?

Take, for example, drug-dealing in the West... now drug dealers have to conduct business in public and with the public, Al-Shabab do not and can remain relatively hidden during their planning and operations. What percentage of the population of Western Towns and cities do you think could accurately identify or name over 50% of their local drug dealers? I'm guessing it's in the region of a few percent - the other ninety-odd percent of people know little or nothing about it.

Your comments are actually harmful to this discourse, you haven't thought them through, and are labelling an entire population when it is, in fact, a minority.

So a decade ago they stopped teaching computer programming in UK schools.

And in the last decade, what... has London stopped being a major Tech Hub? Is there a shortage of good young programmers looking for jobs in London?

The answers to both of those questions is NO. So *my* question is this - if teaching computer programming in schools or not teaching it has no discernable effect, why bother wasting time on lessons on it when they could be devoted to something else?

Probably the fact that the IMEI number can be changed?

To be fair, regardless of simulations, proofs etc. having 50 asteroids of mass 1 tonne each impacting the earth at the same time is *way* less risky than having a single asteroid of 50 tonnes impact - at the very least more of the mass will be burned off in the atmosphere, also the distributed nature, and lower individual impact energies, of the fragments will almost certainly result in less loss of life and less climate change...

Then it sounds like you will need to give some equity in your business away.

Or, consider this - why are you allowing the same guys writing the software to be responsible for testing it? If you genuinely write good specs you should be able to find someone who will write automated testing (and/or engage in manual testing) to meet your spec and apply it against the software provided by the contractor. This should eliminate a very large number of potential bugs. If your specs are good enough you could even offshore this fairly easily - it's very simple work.

Why has your organisation allowed a senior developer to stagnate? Why has he not been given continuous mentoring, training, qualifications etc?

Sounds like your company has failed to educate and train its' workforce and is now suffering. The answer to this question is not "train him" but "examine your training and career progression policies" as it sounds like they need a massive improvement. If they event exist at all.

When this happens, the manager who is in charge of all those people steps in and says "You will co-operate and get things done, or else you will no longer work here".

Actually, to do this would demonstrate very poor management skills - a good manager doesn't just tell people to do things while leaving a broken system in place.

A good manager would modify the work environment in order to incentivise the staff to act in a way which is more in line with the business goals (advancing the kernel) - then they would explain these changes and why they were making them to all involved.

Shouting "DO YOUR JOB" at people has a curiously poor track record for making people, y'know, actually do their job.

Is that Vampirism works?

Debris from 2km away seems preferable to a detonating warhead 5 metres away.

And if we have to switch to renewables anyway, why not do it as soon as possible.

For exactly the same reason that people borrow money. "Why pay 10,000 today when I can pay 11,000 next year". Works for millions of people and businesses.

And it's likely to be *cheaper* to convert to renewables in the future, not more expensive. Of course, you have to factor in the cost (mostly environmental) of the delay in switching... but it's not an equation with an obvious outcome...