Walsingham

Isn't your solution to heartbreak to eat copious amounts of sausage? I didn't mean to make that sound dirty, but I really have no idea how to frame that question differently. LOL. Yes. Good thing none of us are Freudians. Or Freud. He'd probably pass out. My point is that surrendering to emotion is a lovely notion but utterly flawed in a lot of instances. Not all, by any means, but a lot. Irritation, envy, lust, badgers. All these things can destroy your whole life far more effiiciently than being a bit Remains of the Day. Commit a theft, spread lies about someone, lash out, get an STD... the list goes on. Controlling to me means the classic "Put up, shut up, or shut down". Have the emotion and don't do anything about it. Don't dwell on the emotion any more than you have to. Or lock it down through doing your local cultural equivalent of smoking a pipe and glaring. Yes, you get pressure leaks occasionally, and you may have to go off for a while and have a cry and a beer. But how is that so bad?

Hang on, isn't that confusing the biological concomitant with the mental experience? I'm saying that the architecture sustaining happiness is so ephemeral as to render it a wil-o-the-wisp. Not that the squelchy mess of glands and neurons is.

I see what you mean, and I've considered it. But I do sometimes think that some wounds are best left as they are, or may never heal square. Reopening them and venting them can just cause pain to no purpose. But I could easily be biased.

I guess it could be the way primitive man first found out he could use hunting spears for murdering people. By accident! The 'fact' is that they simply swallowed a portion of all internet traffic for a time. To my primitive understanding that has to be significant. To Gorth I'd say that yes it was only a matter of time before we saw information warfare being conducted with physical connections to the mediums of information exchange. But all the same, I'm going to indulge a maudlin moment of sadness that yet more of humanity's daily toil will be devoted to a completely new dimension of bashing one another rather than grappling with the many natural ills which threaten us.

I'm going to keep saying this until someone punches me or explains why I'm wrong: Complex games have emergent properties, especially when played on a smorgasbord of game platforms, not just consoles. It's simple system theory. So we can either put up with a few bugs in games which give us freedom, multiple game mechanics, and stories... or we can play Super Mario Platform Punch 15.

I must say it surely speaks volumes that people join up just to say how good the game is. I'm still holding off, because I can't afford the distraction now. So it being awesome actually makes the situation worse!

Junkyard, surely?

I take it then that you don't follow the Yerkes-Dodson notion of optimal stress, as an inverted U shape? Also, happiness is a byproduct - a want have not a must have. Moreover, the achievement of it constantly shifts. Rich people want less possessions, married people want to be free, lonely people want to be married. I want an ice cream. The pursuit of happiness as if it is something real is (so I appear to be arguing) a shifting phantasm. And teh pursuit of happiness is as doomed as the effort of shooting a tortoise.

Make sure you visit Bath. I have to say it's pretty cool. Especially if you can hit in early August while it's sunny.

Nonsense, Krez. It's perfectly possible to control your emotions. The pressure may evince itself in maladaptive ways, but the actual emotion can be restrained. Obviously I'm old school in this respect, but I've seen far more harm done by acting out emotions and saying "I couldn't help it" than I have from suppressing them.

Story When does 'gently encouraging reform through economic engagement' become "I have in my hand a piece of paper"?

What happens when we are secure is we don't get stabbed in the cheeks. Methinks you've strayed a wee bit far from real lif, mate. Happy? HAPPY? Go sit in the corner and think about what you said.

You speak wise words indeed. I can easily see this happening.

Play some more.

I don't wish to sound racist, but I'll take Italy over France any day. particularly at this time of year. In fact, if I knew I was going to Italy I wouldn't even eat in England, just drink beer and nibble bar snacks. As far as tourism goes, it depends what you find interesting.

Not so much sheep, as slaves. Gladiators if you will. It's no use demanding a biffer spear if the rules say you have to fight with spears of a certain size. More importantly, no one can simply invent a gun and use that. They should have freestyle racing. Combined with target shooting at 4K ranges. And part of the course should be across a volcano. EDITL and then at the end of each race the various teams have to have a fight in a jungle caldera. In a rain storm.

Very very important: disable the 'smart' camera. Or you will shriek louder than any known species of monkey. In every other respect, it's just fun. Not work. Fun. The only complication with which is that if you try and forge through it then you will get frustrated. On the other hand if you eventually relax and just see attempt X as yet another chance to enjoy flipping about like a mentalist then it's pure delight.

Forgive me digging my heels in for a moment, but: 1. I assume that the centre was responsible for three roles: - Pre-emptive outbreak modelling - Analysis of possible outbreaks - Command coordination in the event of outbreak 2. Even if we assume the centre was doing its job well then these roles will be subsumed - The broader academic community and (among others) UK and US government bodies will continue modelling outbreaks - Spotting outbreaks will, ultimately occur eventually, when local hospitals spot the development - Command coordination requires different elements working together depending on the scale of the outbreak. In the event of a really serious pandemic you'd want coordination at the Oz equivalent of COBRA, or the Army. Because you would need to enforce quarantine and control supplies, maintain public order etc 3. In my experience when a govt. initiative folds 90% of the time it's because the people in charge were either crap or ****ing off everyone around them. Either eventuality precludes them doing an effective command and liaison role. Pop may or may not agree.

Awesome. So you're saying we could be the first! Go humans! *Raises the roof*

Hang on. Money does more than make us happy. It also does things like provide security, seed growth for the future and so on. Also, I object to the notion that brain work is better than physical work. We are apes, and brain work stresses us out without burning stress chemicals. Until I hurt my back I always tried to do brain work mixed with exercise of one sort or another. And no, mkreku, not THAT exercise.

Trying to draw system explanatory diagrams. Program is - to put it politely - not optimised for my work style. Decided to stop when the fifth incident where the tool I'm using mysteriously reverts to something else caused me to thump my desk so hard I caused passers by to look up outside the building, broke my mouse into two pieces, and hurt my bloody hand. All fixed now, though.

What time of year are we talking? Because England in Autumn is ****, quite frankly.

I wonder how many galactic civilisations have died off at a crucial point by inducing a black hole in their planet? Weird thought.

They could do both. Nice clear night, it would look lovely.

Unless I'm just being thick I don't think you've engaged with my main point, Krez. To clarify, it comes in three parts: 1. As the highest award for peace the Nobel should be handed out to persons in power who turn from violence to peace. 2. Handing a Nobel to issues that are still 'live' can actually confuse and exacerbate the situation rather than promoting peace. 3. If live campaigners need support then it is better handled by bodies who will take a sustained and dynamic interest, not simply parachute an award in.