Rumour has it that Gibson walked out part way through because it was so similar to what he'd already imagined for what became the setting for Neuromancer

Google "deindividuation" to see that once part of the mob, there were probably no "some of them" acting for any other reason than as part of the general violence and theft. I can't prove that there was an absence of people thinking that they could change things by their actions (however dumb that would make them), but then absences are notoriously difficult to prove - can you prove a presence of them?

There's been a lot written about these "riots", as if the authors were looking at individual rioters' motivations, but basic mob psychology suggests that becoming part of a mob relives the individual of individual motivations or at least the usual demotivators that affect their behaviour as shown in (or similar to) the Milgrim and Stanford Prison Experiments. My take on the thing is that there was some initial anger influenced by general and specific circumstances but then, when those involved saw that their actions weren't being clamped down on, they became a mob and lost some of their personal self control, which is when the hell started breaking loose.

Individuals won't last long against a mob, but this supposedly shows a group of people scaring the looters away from their businesses. Seems like the looters don't deal well with people standing up to them

Given how thin the walls in my last house were, I don't think I'd like to live in one built with less materials. Sounds like a race to the bottom with things being cheap and use once then recycle rather than built to a good standard and to last for a while. It might boost the GDP, but I'd rather not live in a cardboard and polythene house.

Is there a reason for wanting to increase the economic growth of a nation other than the fact that we've all been told it's a Good Thing all our lives? Has it cleaned our air or water (when getting them dirty has added to the GDP), made a more law abiding population (when paying for the crimes add to the GDP) made a healthier or happier population (when hospital use and medication increases GDP) or a more peaceful nation (when war and other military activity adds to the GDP)?

Does just charging more (and getting people to pay it) for something increase the economic output of that thing? If so, would legalising narcotics* decrease their economic output? Does inflation mean automatic economic growth?

*assuming that legalising them would bring their street price down

So does this disprove the greenhouse effect and radiative heat transfer will continue to vary as T^4 regardless of what we put in the atmosphere?

I'm not saying I know the cost saving for pv solar panels, but the Daily Mail is hardly a good source of reliable information

Or adapt standard Slashdot units maybe? Amount of energy released by burning 1 Library of Congress = 1 BLC Amount of energy required to make a Volkswagen from mining the ore to finished product = 1 VW

There are some landfill sites in England that are producing electricity from the landfill gas: http://www.eco2uk.com/en/our_projects/landfill_gas.asp I don't know how much they're making from this or how much of that is from selling electricity and how much from government green grants, but there's enough money from somewhere to make it happen on admittedly fairly small scales

Hold stick near centre of its length. Moisten pointed end in mouth. Insert in tooth space, blunt end next to gum. Use gentle in-out motion.

welcome outside

Wonko the Sane

B. Everyone else - you mean we'll be going back to the AOL days?

"Libel law is a violation of free speech and should be abolished."

So do you believe I should be allowed to email your boss and colleagues / friends / partner / newspapers / whoever else that you are a sadistic paedophile with details of your illicit sexual encounters?

What do you want it to do that you think it doesn't?

Nah - the commenter means wearing Casio F-91W watches. I'm getting one as soon as these 5-star resorts become compulsory for anyone caught wearing one

Start here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/secret-memos-expose-link-between-oil-firms-and-invasion-of-iraq-2269610.html for the British interest when it looked like America and one or two other countries would get all the oil and continue with your own research.

If you're in America, you probably don't use oil from as far away as Iraq - there's a couple of countries to the south that you mostly buy from, with some the north. Look up "oil speculation" and "limited resource" for further information on its price (really limited or artificially like diamonds I could tell you, but considering how much is being spent to get it out of tar sands I'd expect the former)

You think they're reading much Kafka in gitmo?