Walsingham

I didn't mean to be rude, BTW. I like anyone who makes an effort. But after talking it through, I think you chaps ought to work at something else with your undoubted talent and enthusiasm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition One of the better Wikipedia articles out there. Worth a read. I don't wish to be harsh but this theory is pretty much a Just So Story, ignoring the fact that it could be tested in future. The article itself points out that there are many countries where the theory does not seem to apply. I was already thinking of Nigeria before I read it through. In any event, the connection is as much to economic development as anything else. I am positing that population growth is already far beyond any reasonable rate of economic growth. I suggest that this will provoke still greater inequality and instability, maintaining high birth rates as the only form of social security most people will ever see.

Look, I've had enough of this. I'll keep your notions on mental file. But I'm not about to let you dissaude me of the version of history imparted to me by numerous books and eye witnesses. Particularly, if I'm brutally honest, given your penchant for 9/11 deniers and the proposal that Al Qaeda doesn't exist. As I have said before, if you're really a student in this area you have much to learn about establishing credibility. Last man out, turn off the lights.

Those are usually stress related. E.g. lack of sleep, excessive concentration for hours (an exam, coding a programme). Obvious as it is, I appreciate the thought. Intense day, all round. But pretty cool. Lots of things clicking together. Even if I found myself concentrating at breakneck speed to keep up with events.

I'm going to get me a bowel disruptor and hunt casual racists.

I guess I should stress that my front line immediate objection is that there have been debates at various national levels over what is appropriate for the government to hold on you. And the results of those debates have been that the government should only hold data it needs. My point here is what genuine reason could Facebook have to develop or license software that can accumulate your facial biometrics? How would you feel if your local coffee shop was doing this? It would be ****ing creepy and weird.

A good point, Krez. But only if you buy the essential premise that birth rates go down as population increases. I don't. 1. Pointing at Western Europe as evidence ignores the importance of culture rather than numbers. And commits the cardinal sin of extending historical trends in complex data. 2. Population is booming worlwide and migration is occurring worldwide, and at least in Europe whether we want it or not. Individual countries are not the question any more. EDIT: 3. Believing that the problem of youth unemployment will solve itself is comforting, but explosively dangerous if untrue.

I can't decide if that's a defence of the system, or one example of why one shouldn't belong to it. Actually, it's crystallised a point I'm not clear on. I may not be a Facebook user, but other people can take photos of me, upload them and I can acquire a profile in thi ssoftware irrespective of what I sign?

*gentle smile* Well, sure that's an option. If you discount human my view of human psychology. No way is everyone going to take a hit. People will try to opt out. Whether by tax evasion, moving, so on and so forth. One way which just occurred t me and is therefore probably bollocks, is to ship our eldsters overseas. Basically, all overseas development aid is delivered by eldster care. Foreigners work for less, land costs less, the weather is generally warmer. Scheme is viable so long as there are gross inequalities in national earning power. So, cynically, forever. This also depends on people being honest about how often they will visit their elderly relatives. Which I reckon might actually go up in frequency if they're living somewhere fun, like Cote D'Ivoire, rather than Bognor Regis.

Then one of us has misunderstood the capability of the software.

Again, I am baffled by the sheer - I do not know the right word - of the green movement. Either we are facing a phenomenon of staggering lethal quality or we aren't. If we are then why not shoot camels? This is probably the main reason why I don't side with the greens. It's not that I don't think global warming is happening. I just have no faith whatsoever in anyone doing anything about it, least of all its principle acolytes, so I'm damned if I'll waste my time worrying. And this was genuinely intended to be nothing more than a thread about a simple script idea.

Because the atrocities occurred. Srebrenica is a neat hook for people's minds. But disprove Srebrenica and the atrocities don't magically disappear. Listen, take it from a Brit. You can't write the bad things your country has done out of history. You have to try to do some good to balance them out.

Following three friends who try to make money by becoming Mad Max style camel hunting mercenaries. Thought I'd throw this out there, see if any of you chaps felt like writing it up as a film. Based on a true idea.

I believe this is being talked about wrt Social Security. There are currently two tiers of retirement: 1) Retire at age 65. This nets you a certain amount. 2) Retire at age 67. This nets you a higher amount than retiring at age 65. I think Ive heard/read somewhere that they are now talking about backing the reitrement age to 72. True, but this is not just about what age people are wiling to work until. Jobs have to be found for them. Perhaps more importantly, the jobs those people are occupying before they retire are jobs 'needed' for other people. This is what I meant about a ballooning population. You've got pressure from young jobless at the other end of the system. God, this is depressing.

Hang on. Your job is being tortured?

Thanks, Deathdealer. I found a 6.5 to 3.5 mil jack. Should do the trick. On balance I like the notion of a proper microphone, rather than a headset. Will give my gaming a radio DJ feel. Plus I can't find a single headset mic that would qualify as recording standard.

The central issue here is that while Srebrenica may or may not have been the occasion of an atrocity, atrocities were committed on a broad scale. I've spoken to too many peacekeepers with first hand experience, in addition to reading around the subject (when I was primarily interested in Rwanda) to ever believe otherwise. That's why we aren't engaging with you directly over this point of history. That's also why this attempt to expiate some sort of notion of guilt - which is what I suspect it is - is a wasted effort.

Oddly enough, I was just thinking about this issue, in response to an article about a new heart drug. It seems to me that the central problem is that we are doing everything possible to live longer, and refusing to face the fact that our current system was designed for a population who lived to their seventies, not nineties. To my mind there are only three options: 1. Increase the productivity of the active population - although I think there might be objections on the part of the bastards actcually working. 2. Die slightly earlier - which I must say I like the idea of, proving I'm an idiot 3. Extend the productive age of people. Although with a ballooning world population and unemployment already huge in many regions, that may not be a solution. I just can't slice it any differently. EDIT: 4. Reduce the burden caused by the aged. Maybe some sort of artificial reality? Although I'm not sure if that's any better than euthanasia in philosophical terms.

Because - to the best of my understanding, and I'm open to correction - Facebook is effectively compiling data on your image that would permit you to be recognised by any visual system. Meaning that an organisation or person with access to that database would be able to identify you from an anonymous photo. This is something which has been brought up for consideration in the UK as a national security initiative and rejected roundly as an intrusive Big Brother measure. And remember who this is telling you. I'm hardly a conspiracy theorist. As others have commented this is as much about consent as it is what is being done. This is intensive profiling with effects that could last your entire life. If some daft bimbo wants to sign up for it to save then 2 seconds typing then that's their choice. It shoud not have been activated as a default.

You can't please all the people... Mass market anything is going to compromise, not so much on quality, but on the extremes within that quality. So I think we're already witnessing a drive to make everything fast moving, with simple dynamics, and minimal requirement to delve into a storyline or understand characters. But equally hard action addicts are stuck in only a couple of franchises. We all have to share the same 'space' and consequently we're going to be like a student flatshare - bloody annoying.

Also, waiting for some damn advice on buying a mic so I can place an order for necessary stationery at the same time.

North Wales?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/face...criticised.html Not being a Facebook user I'm feeling unconscionably smug about this. Facebook has "quietly switched on" technology which studies the tagged images of you and profiles what you look like. Yet again I see a private company acting in a way which would be unconstitutional in many liberal democracies. I've never been in Facebook directly. If you are, you need to either complain or just pack up and leave.

The tic in my left eye has started up again.

I can't imagine this being worth a fraction of the effort. Seriously. Just use the editor in the FO NV engine. Or have I missed something?