I bought a Soda Stream and when I opened the box there was a piece of paper saying that you are licencing the soda stream technology, not buying it. I looked and there was small print in a pargraph on the side saying the same thing. I think it said it was a transferable licence and that you could only use it for the purposes intended by soda stream.

This is the first attempt I have seen that a kitchen appliance is being sold with the idea that you are not buying the appliance, and will never own it, just licence it. That strikes at the heart of the 'buying' something at the store. This is an attempt at a business model that maintains control of your carbonated water maker in perpetuity. I look forward to the test for this business model in court.

No the gun and the bullets killed the kids, the gunman used the killing machines and pointed them in the right direction with the intent to kill. If the killer had had a knife, at least he would have had to work for those kills, it would have taken more time, more kids might have been saved, the teachers would have had a chance to get between him and the kids and maybe subdue him.

Guns are efficient , impersonal tools that allow people to engage in killing in very impersonal ways, like a video game. I suspect we have more death and injury from guns because they can reach out and kill without the shooter being at risk or having to work for the kill. Too easy, to impersonal so we end up at risk.

I for one when I have to go to the bathroom really badly can miss the combination on the bathroom a few times before success. I suspect if there is a shooter around the same would hold. Also if a gun wielding person (don't want to leave out the ladies) comes into the classroom, what would you think he would do if he saw the teacher start opening the safe?

I am sick and tired of the NRA knee jerk activists that are first to scream, don't call attention to the fact that we want to keep our guns, lots of guns, semi automatic people killing guns because of a flawed Supreme Court decision, in the face of yet another MASS shooting of innocent people in public areas, Theaters, Malls, Schools. Its not just the people that do the killing, its the guns, the gun culture, the easy access to guns. Criminals can get easy access to guns because there are so many around to buy or steal. If they were rare, the price would be higher and you would have fewer criminals being able to afford guns (free market supply side economics at work, how can you argue with that). The specious argument that it is people not guns that do the killing, I would argue that a person without a gun would not be able to go into a school and kill 20 children , or into a theater and mow down rank after rank of people in a easy, impersonal way.

Lets have some sanity about guns as a privileged and not a right or if you like a right that is regulated in a sane way that prevents or make this kind of travesty rare.

The gun lobby has no solution to this problem. They are silent on the matter and want you to be silent too.

The difference is the University programs are designed to (one might argue against particular schools or programs but in general). give an overall coverage of all the important areas of the topic to give a well rounded person in the field. It is possible to read the text books yourself, but doing the projects and getting the feedback and someone to answer the questions is a more complete and concentrated study.

You can fill in a gap here and a gap there but if you have no immediate need you probably won't go through the trouble to really study something, and the more important point, is often you don't know what you should know to be able to ask the question of find the information you need or a different better way to approach some problem.

So they are not equivalent but the information is out there.

University education is not just to get a job. The unfortunate misconception is that that is the only reason you go to school. Or to state it a different way, Universities are not trade schools, never have, nor should never be.They teach fields of study, how the think, review the theories, ideas and practices of a field, give you access to other fields of study so you understand more than just one field.

You learn how to think critically, how to do research, how to present ideas clearly (or at least those are goals). So in the end you come out a better more well rounded person with skills that are applicable in many fields of endevour.

I have noticed a very big difference in self taught and university taught programmers. The difference can be striking with the university taught, having studied multiple languages and problem spaces are more easily able to learn new things and are not trapped in a single language/tool space for solutions.

That is not to say self taught programmers are bad, many are quite capable but would be much better deeper level programmers if they had also sudied, say OOP or OAD and Data Structures and Analysis of algorithms, and some AI and some Business Programming and Some Database design and programming. Usually the biggest deficit I see is the Data Structures and analysis of algorithms part with is much more difficult to pick up DIY unless the programmer is very motivated.

The problem is that many employers are wanting to get programmers on the cheap (offshore presure) and don't and can't see the value of real engineering that goes into programming. To them is all code and one program is like the next. Not so my friend.

Your kidding right? Evolution as a process, like most scientific theories it has predictive and explanatory power. We see that evolution happens, take drug resistant bacteria. We see how with selective breeding in just a few thousand years we can have widely divergent dog breeds and types of plants. In our world of computers, Genetic algorithms can solve difficult problems by just following those parts of genetics that combine parts of solutions and introduces mutations and a survival rule that culls the herd. It works, I have done that. I have come up with 'intelligent' answers to problems that the only driving principle was survival, not some unseen intelligent force. So we know that the process of Evolution is a fact and practical. The teaching of creationism on the other hand is a cop out. They claim the world is 6000 years old, they claim dinosaurs co-existed with man (and woman), that man (and woman) suddenly appeared full sized and full figured in God's image (he must have been a Black Man then). That the scientists have it all wrong about radioactive decay and tree rings and layers of sediment to show when things happened. They are much like some segments of the political parties that have no problem of making up facts to fit their theories. And also we know they think that Rape is part of God's design.

I'm sorry but there is no equivalence here. None. It is the same equivalence that is being drawn by those in politics that say that both political parties are the same. A little rational thought is in order.

I applaude the UK for this position. It is about time. One of the tenates of the Anglican Church is that you can use your rational mind to interpret the scriptures. You can see here that the Church of England's influence has had a rational effect on the Government that we don't see here in the Evangelical, bible belt, earth was created in 4006 BC. states (like Louisiana) that is just starting to require teaching creationism in schools.

I hope we catch the rational bug soon.

Go UK

I can see some company step up and for an extra price will solder those to a board with pins. If done right the cost should not be too much. But it is sad that Intel would not think that there was a thriving inventive market out there providing new ideas and invention using their technology.

I'm sure the first time a police officer asks for a bribe to let you out of a traffic ticket or slams you against the ground because he did not like the bumber stickers on your car, you will wish that the whole episode was being recorded. We have seen a few officers caught on tape being mean violent bullies have to pay the piper. Without those pieces of video it is the revered representative of the law's word against yours. The court usually favors its own and they know it.

That is not to say that more than a small percentage of law officers are bad seed, but this they are paid by the public to do the publics work in law enforcement and they are and should be beholding to us as their bosses and be held to a very high standard of conduct. Most law officers do their duty honorably but those that don't should be held account or we drop into a police state.

Here is where your voice can be heard. Send an email to your Senator, your Congressman and the party leader, President Obama and let them know your feelings about whether that is really the will of the people and not the for the special interest of law enforcement at the expense of the rest of the citizenry.

Looks like they were no over the property, just within eye shot so to speak.

Another gamble ups the anti.

Ah yes, but algorithms are the path to enlightened code. Just like the practices of chanting certain phases, or solving a koan, or going through the steps of the Masons.

Let me use another analogy (actually programming is the art of analogy). Chess.

You have a board. (defined totally)
You have pieces
        Their characteristics are defined. Where they start. how they move.
You have initial piece placement.
You have some special rules (pawn en passant, castling, pawn promotion, responding to check, not moving into check)
You have the end (king check mate)

A start, a path, and end. Just like programming. but there are many paths, to the point that the problem is so complex that there are people that are beginners and people that are Chess Masters. Is there a difference in a game between Chess Masters vs beginners. Only someone with a good level of understanding of the game maybe could tell. It is just pieces on a board moved around, must be craft right?