Comment: Re:Biometric guns in movies (Score 1) 731
That would be License to Kill (a better film than Skyfall in most respects) although the baddie in question didn't get shot. As I recall, he just hit Bond over the head with it instead.
Comment: Re:Almost there (Score 1) 241
Because you've run out of "oysters"?
Comment: Re:More shady business (Score 1) 68
Even the WBC has some standards and morality.
HAHAAHAAAAAhaaahaa!
I'm sorry, but you lost me there.
Comment: Re:Do snails produce 'mucus?' (Score 2) 74
I feed mine garlic from birth. Saves time. Producing a self-sautéeing snail is proving to be more difficult.
Comment: Re:More shady business (Score 2) 68
Great, another family of lawyers. Any chance we could pit them against WBC and kill >0 bird with 1 stone?
Comment: Re:I sense a great disturbance in the web... (Score 1) 221
As it happens, brass (as with many copper alloys) is bacteriostatic, which mades it a good choice for door handles. Much better than so-called stainless steel, in fact.
Comment: Re:the scare the women marketing strategy (Score 1) 221
like those automatic soap dispenser advertising that then you don't get germs from touching it.
I'd think that normally you touch the soap before you wash you hands
Either way, the next thing you touch is the tap, then again after you've washed your hands. I can't fathom what practical purpose those automatic soap dispensers serve, besides extracting more money from clean freaks.
Interviews: McAfee Says House Fire Was No Accident 84
Posted
by
samzenpus
from the burning-down-the-house dept.
from the burning-down-the-house dept.
According to reports a bush fire burned down John McAfee's home in Belize on Thursday. The local fire department was unable to to contain the blaze and the the two main buildings were completely destroyed. Property Manager Noel Codd (who was not there at the time) estimated the value of the buildings at $250,000 each. Despite the reported cause of the fire, McAfee says that the destruction of his compound was no accident. We caught up with him to talk about why he thinks the fire was set and what he plans to do now. Read below to see what he had to say.
Comment: Re:yah (Score 1) 78
I think you've overestimated how easy it is to get useful work when your delta-T is only about 60 degrees.
Comment: Re:This thought crosses my mind a lot. (Score 1) 807
Hmm, fembots. I suppose the Apple model will be prettier, but much more expensive?
Comment: Re:Six years is not a short term (Score 1) 104
And these are federal crimes, so they'll probably spend it in a federal prison.
Doubtful, unless the US tries to extradite them from the UK. Despite one of the targets being the USAF they would still face some opposition in the face of the McKinnon debacle.
Comment: Re:Is it bribery? (Score 4, Insightful) 317
Would you also include independent candidates in this? If so, where do you draw the line?
If you ban campaign contributions entirely (which I would probably support) you would also have to limit the amount of money a candidate is allowed to spend on campaigning, so that the richest candidate doesn't win just because they can afford the best PR. That limit would have to be either very low, so that pretty much anyone could be a candidate, or the state would have to pay. Neither of these seems feasible.
Bribery, to me, is more about paying someone to do something they shouldn't do, or that person demanding payment to do what they ought to. This might include letting a parking ticket slide, voting against the wishes of those one is supposed to represent or blowing some rich old geezer (I imagine).
I don't see a problem in supporting the campaign of a candidate whom I believe will do a good job of representing me, though I deplore the need to do so. However, when a business does the same, that's quite different; governments should serve people, not legal fictions. I'd be very much in favour of banning all but private donations, and open to the idea of limiting those severely.
Comment: Re:Isn't that called "the internet"? (Score 1) 614
I will pay the TV tax today if you let me access iPlayer. Here that BBC? Here that Populace of the UK? You could let us foreigners pay your TV tax and have that much more funding or lower the tax on yourselves.
If you lot start paying "tax"* you'll get odd ideas about having a say in how the money is spent. That didn't end well for us last time, and that was before the Kardashians.
Thanks, but no thanks.
*FYI it's not a tax, strictly speaking.
Comment: Re:Hate drones (Score 1) 72
So it is OK to shoot down a plane just because it doesn't have a person in it?
That depends, are there a lot of people under it as well?
Comment: Re:Hopeless (Score 1, Insightful) 292
Also, what happens if the country in question falls apart and someone decides they want to give it back to you later in the form of a dirty bomb?
I don't think there are many vitrification plants in Kreplakistan. It's far more likely the waste would be sent somewhere like France or Canada. Are you really that worried about the Canucks?