Excellent password manager. Syncs an AES-encrypted file to all your devices. It also has plug-ins for most web browsers (Firefox, Chrome, Safari) that allow you to login automatically on a web site. I personnally don't use the plugins, but it's really good on both Android and Mac OS X.
No, I'm afraid you don't understand a few things. Firstly, Scotland's oil is small beer on the global stage. The North Sea produces ~1.5m bpd, OPEC alone is something like 30m. Scotland could turn off the taps and the planet wouldn't even blink.
Bzzzt! Sorry Wrong Answer! Try again.
And I quote: "The largest field discovered in the past 25 years is Buzzard also located off Scotland, found in June 2001 with producible reserves of almost 64×106 m (400m bbl) and an average output of 28 600 m to 30 200 m (180,000-190,000 bbl) per day." (Source here).
It's not just the production that counts - it's also the size of the reserves, the fact that Scotland is very close to its primary market (the EU) and its own stability.
And, if you happen to believe that Peak Oil is almost upon us (and there is no reason to believe otherwise) then that Oil is going to be more and more valuable as time passes...
Think Venezuela, not Norway.
No, adopting the Euro is a requirement for new entrants. Countries that were previously part of the EU and did not adopt were grandfathered in and don't have to change, but for new entrants it's not optional.
It's actually the reverse: you have to be an EU member before you can adopt the Euro as your local currency.
Again, there are countries (Poland comes to mind) that are EU members, but retain their local currency. The zloty, in the case of Poland.
As far as I know, membership in the Eurozone is optional.
I personally believe Scotland would be best served by gaining its independence, ditching the Queen, proclaiming the Scottish Republic, ditching the british pound (replacing it with, let's say, the Scottish pound), kicking the British banks out, creating its own (strongly regulated) scottish banking system and applying for EU membership. But that's just me.
I commend you on your mastery of French, my dear "Jez"! I am impressed that you can use Google Translate!
I'll let you know that Brittany has never been an independent Kingdom, unlike the Kingdom of Scotland, but rather a "Dukedom". Its claim to independence are therefore very much in doubt. And don't get me started on Corsica, OK?
The EU has a bunch of sad laws that discriminate against non-EU countries for trade.
Oh really? Care to back that assertion with facts and links?
Oh right, you can't, because the EU is one of the most open market in the world.
This has hurt the UK quite badly when it came to trade with other common wealth countries that weren't part of the EU.
The UK has been nothing but a pain in the arse since day one of its membership. Screw them. Read this if you dare.
The way Australia got screwed was pretty bad and I think people that remember still hold it against the UK to this day.
Oh, you mean Australia? The country that is one of the biggest trade partner of the EU? Gosh darn, those poor Aussies sure got screwed in those deals. Which deals, by the way? Again, lots of innuendo, but not too many facts and figures, if I dare say so myself.
The yes campaign is telling people they can keep the pound and join Europe. Not gonna happen, it isn't for Scotland to decide.
It is for Scotland to decide! They can apply for membership any time, just like Turkey, for instance.
28 countries have to decide they are totally cool with a bit of the UK splitting off and joining Europe. That means 28 countries have to want to set a precident for bits of themselves splitting off, declaring independence and joining Europe.
Errr... Ever heard of the Czech and the Slovaks?
Czechoslovakia split in two (peacefully) and both halves joined the EU right away, and were welcome with open arms, if memory serves well.
I don't see why Scotland would be rejected, especially since the UK has been a pain in the arse ever since it joined the EU. As a matter of fact, many countries in the EU would welcome Scotland just to piss off the Brits. And even more so since the UK is set to vote on leaving the EU in a couple of years!
They have to also decide that they are totally cool on Scotland having an opt out on the Euro that nobody else apart from the UK has and nobody else likes.
The Euro is not the EU, and vice-versa. There is a ton of countries that are EU members, but still have their national currencies. But don't take my word for it, click here instead
The rest of the UK doesn't particularly want a currency union with Scotland, and it wouldn't be popular with the Eurozone countries to have a more formal sterling zone (they don't care about the small overseas territories, but a second full size country in a currency union would be a big deal).
You are not making any sense - again, the currency you use is totally independent from EU membership itself.
Ah yes, but you forget a couple of things here...
First of all, Scotland would be one of two EU nations to produce its own oil and gaz (the other is Norway). That gives it A LOT of leverage, especially since they can't possibly burn all that fuel in Scotland itself.
After the initial shock, you can bet dozens of countries (China? Japan? others?) would send delegations to Scotland to finance pretty much everything they want, provided they get a piece of the North Sea action (so to speak).
Second, there is a very common doctrine in newly-formed nations to refuse to honor all debts contracted in their names before independence. Hence, whatever debt the UK had, Scotland can now refuse, since it is now independent. That would blow the whole of the City of London to smithereens (which is a very good reason to vote Yes if you happen to be a Scot).
Combine the two, and you have a newly independent country, with zero debts and very interesting natural resources. Give it a little time, and investors from all over the world would beat a path to Scotland's door, checkbooks in hand.
Sure, the economic transition would be quite difficult, especially if the SNP persists in its own silly plan of keeping the Queen, keeping the pound (soooo stupid this one!) and applying for EU membership, but Scotland has a lot going for it.
Whether it can avoid the natural ressource trap is something else again, of course...
Even now, Putin is hovering over the list of first strike cities, ready and waiting to strike Glasgow and Edinburgh from the list. Let me save you, he whispers gently. Expel those weapons. You'll be so much safer.
Putin does not give a flying fuck about Scotland, he is got his hands full in the Ukraine.
Plus, an independent Scotland could sell Whisky to Russia, and I have never met a russian who turned down a glass of (good) booze.
Plus, you can be sure that large numbers of the English buying public will boycott your products, just because. #scotfree
Fine, if Scotland becomes independent again, the French will buy all the Scotch whisky they can get their hand on!
On a more personal note: "Votez 'Oui', amis écossais ! Juste pour emmerder les Anglais !". The Auld Alliance shall rise again!
So much FUD, so little time...
funding will be tougher to find and more expensive... Really? If your ideas are interesting, Kickstarter will be happy to take on your project.
no local banks... Really? That does not make any sense. The best you can do, then, is to start your own bank in Scotland. Agreed, that is not an easy project to undertake, but, remember... "That's where the money is"! Besides, the City is a den of thieves, Scottish people should vote "Yes" just to get rid of the whole sorry mess.
access to EU markets and the freedom of movement will be curtailed... Really? Even though the leaders of the SNP, campaigning for independence, have said repeatedly that they would apply for EU membership right away? Why would they do that, now, since the EU is in a deep economic and institutional slump, is completely beyond me, but still...
Seriously, this is FUD, pure and simple, from Mr McKenzie. A bit of advice for the "No" camp: you can probably have much better, and much more convincing arguments than that. If this is the best you can do, you deserve to be roundly beaten by the "Yes" camp.
And, on a more personal note: "Votez 'Oui', amis écossais ! Juste pour emmerder les Anglais !". The Auld Alliance shall rise again!
(That last line said firmly tongue in cheek, of course).
Are you trying to imply that people using these exploits are street gangs? Or drug suppliers?
I was more thinking about mob justice - sometimes, the people who were hanged really were innocent.
In a "darker" way, this could start an arms race, with scammers trying to take down machines and hitting innocent people and/or cyberwar getting started because of attacks on scammers and counter-attacks from the scammers tripping automated defense systems due to spiraling conflicts and increasingly sophisticated tools being employed by all sides. Collateral damage and all that. Not a pretty sight.
Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?
... Depends if your IP address is dynamic or not. In my case, all I have to do is reset the DSL modem/router and, presto ! New IP!
I am more concerned about the legality of it. Running a live exploit on their network may make some ISPs fidgety. Also not sure about the position of law enforcement agencies...
A server is just a bigger laptop. Don't laugh: technologies such as virtualization, para-virtualization, SSD, dual-type disk drive HDD+SSD, low-power CPUs, multiple high-density CPU cores and even high-end graphical cards can be found in both types of PC (Think OpenCL on the server, and Unreal Tournament -- or whatever the shoot'em up du jour is -- on the laptop for that last one).
Linux and BSDs make this possible, even trivial. Heck, these days, a lot of people even test entire server platforms or AJAX applications on virtual machines on their laptop - I know I do. Ideally, all machine should be both servers and personal machine.
I want my operating system to be flexible and able to adapt to different computing platforms. I want something smart enough not to push a GUI down my throat if I don't need it. Improvements on one platform will also be a benefit to the other. Having a laptop with 24 to 48 CPU cores may still be science-fiction today. But it won't be tomorrow. On the other hand, building a fast SSD-only Petabyte server using nothing but laptop SSDs would allow you to cram way more data... for less price than those slow SATA disks.
In other words: splitting Linux is simply a bad idea. Thanks, but no thanks.
Read them and weep: http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/...
TL;DR? Essentially, KDE may end up switching to systemd. Because Gnome (and every other Linux fan-boi) does it.
Thank you, you have just summed up the abomination that is systemd for all of us.
Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!
