costard

Damn. I didn't want to know after all.

hijack! Jon, every month my OS updates and downloads a "Malicious Software Removal Tool". Should I be worried?

Morally, you're only obliged to answer truthfully about the situation if asked; you're not required to forewarn the husband. If you're uncomfortable providing the help, you should probably limit it to pointing the way to a useful lawyer, or urging a more open approach: no-one likes to be ambushed. Don't kid yourself about where you stand in the fight - take a side or get the hell out. [my 2 cents]

I hate it when he does that.

Good to hear you werent squidged SO. Sort of... Is the water level now permanently over the roads in that clip, or is that just temporary flooding?

Bunyips don't live in Bunyip ya nong - they're ubiquitous. Taste a bit like chicken - if you can get those that have eaten well during drop-bear season.

Second that. Thanks Schrullenhaft.

Swim this way Gnome, and I'll set you up in a job that requires you to paddle down a river. Well, a creek anyway. True, you'll have blue balls from sitting in a puddle plant killing goodness all day, but you'll be gainfully employed, once more counted as a tax-paying worthy. Your Peng buddies will chortle and give thanks for the circumstances that see you poisoned while you work and do something you enjoy - all at the same time.

You're just having a bad day tankgeezer - I'm playing a game at the moment where my five M10s have accounted for four Panthers and two StuH for the loss of one of their own. I like 'em, cheap and effective.

The easiest way to get the high compression for a diesel is to have a higher stroke:bore ratio. Longer stroke gets you longer throws in the crank, which gives the engine better torque characteristics and a lower redline - which means less power. Diesels were built heavier as well, so they generally gave a lesser power:weight ratio than petrol engines.

Given that the unit holders of mutual funds are almost entirely little guys trying to get the benefits of scale and risk spread from participation in the fund, this argument would have to be disingenuous, at best. The trader gets his reward for skill in the comission he receives for the trade - taking another bite of the cherry for his company is at least unethical: he's acting on inside information about the movement of shares. At worst, it's theft based around the idea that what the punter doesn't know won't hurt them, and none of them are smart enough to figure out what's going on anyway. The racist comparison was regrettable and I apologise for any distress caused. The last remark concerning a possible course of action open to a sovereign government in the face of such entrenched behaviour in the corporate realm is merely the cutting of the Gordian knot: put the buggers out of work and let the rest know that the behaviour is poorly regarded and will not continue. It shouldn't take too much time for the legal arguments to make their way through the court system in the US, provided there is the recognition on the part of the participants that the fabric of their society is under threat from the continuance of these practices.

Thanks for that ASLVet. I read the commentary as the exchanges fighting it out for the right to sell the shares - the parcel going to the exchange with the highest demand (or the best software, something like that). The bit I find puzzling is that the banks (or traders, anyway) are skimming the profits from their customers. In an industry where trust is the only measure of relative worth of the participants, it would seem to me that they are quite willing to forgo clients in the race for short term profits. So, do they know something we don't (There is no long term future for the market?) or are they just trading on their willingness to screw their clients just a little less than their opposition in order to maintain market share? Either way, I can't see them being around much longer so long as they continue in this fashion. Given their track record (they've proven themselves about as trustworthy as the Pakis and Afghanis), maybe better just to nationalise the businesses and let the rest of the market take heed of the lesson.

Nice find Diesel. Thanks.

Well, maybe. Since 1783 there have been a number of occasions in history where the ruling class of a nation has been lined up against the wall and shot. Only the wilfully ignorant could believe that it won't happen again, given the right set of circumstances. It seems to have been the impetus for the development of the social contract of noblesse oblige, one that the masses will hold the privileged to whether or not the privileged believe it exists.

Seanachai, I'd take the apples but New Zealand apples are considered a biosecurity risk to Australia and we're not allowed to import them. Thanks for the offer but, appreciated.

Apparently Wall Street is getting jittery about the discrepancy between profit reports (positive) and consumer sentiment (negative). If they cannot understand that the discrepancy merely describes the imbalance in legislation aimed at the nation's economic development - the corporation is better represented than the consumer in the legislative outcomes of the political process -then they are hardly likely to be able to adequately assess the degree of sovereign risk they face. The pendulum will swing back, and if it takes another market collapse to bring this about it will be a savage swing indeed.

And I want my manual bound in Emrys hide, gold leaf for the title. Limited edition sort of thing.

Fair enough. I enjoy a good AAR, so I've missed out there. With the arrival of CM Normandy I think you'll see more of what you're looking for with regard to tactically sensible assaults. I've only read Popovski's book on LRDG type operations - I agree it's hard to see how that shock of initial contact, total surprise, could be modelled (and isn't in CM). You'd have to have some sort of freeze or go-slow on the defending troops to give the effect I think. I mean, there's a battle set up and going to happen, so an attack isn't really unexpected. The CMx2 engine does a better job there too. Cheers.

sand digger, I'm sorry you took my post to be denigrating your intellect - it wasn't written with that in mind. As for initiative and surprise, these can be part of the game when you play against a human; the AI has very limited options whereas a human player can make the most of feints, covered approaches, covered arcs (for setting up ambushes and fire sacks), smoke screens...

geese go honk ducks go quack dalem is a cross-threaded wingnut.

Yeah that drop in revs from first to second sounds a bit big. Gearboxes are fun to rebuild - once. After that it's a little bit of a chore. Good luck.

Interesting point. I would argue that our state of health is just as much a "state of being" as life or liberty. In fact, I'd argue that we understand more in the way of our state of health than in liberty. We can measure and change our state of health with the aid of protocols and instruments which are the result of a huge investment in time and ability, we can do it in a timely fashion and it has real and immediate benefits. This is probably why so much has been invested in it. This is probably why it will continue to enjoy investment so long as a society can afford it. Some public health works are not under the mantle of Health Care. What percentage of disease occurence has been solved by the construction and maintenance of sewerage systems? How many city-size sewerage sytems have been built with capital raised as a tax on the populace? Did you know that the management of zoonoses (diseases that transfer from animal to human) accounts for something like eighty percent of the value contributed by the veterinary profession? All that pet stuff - that's the icing on the cake, the real value is in the worming and vaccination programs in domestic herds. The same authority the state assumes when it deprives someone of the right to life. That is, every time the state's army kills an enemy combatant. The same authority the state assumes when it deprives someone of the right to liberty. This isn't an argument worth looking at.

Only those businesses without political interests currently in power, surely. I have to agree there. It would, if you could guarantee good leadership and zero corruption. However, if you can do that, the resources are as well managed in private hands, where competition will lead to innovation and technological advancement, which leads to continuing and further growth. Sorry, you've lost me here - what then is a government's purpose? Bollocks. Plain bollocks. Where good leadership is fostered by a society, that leadership provides for the care of the society. What we're seeing is the need to change some fundamentals in behaviour expressing itself in the collapse of those structures required to generate and maintain the wealth of the society: those structures have had their foundations mined to make for more superstructure. For example, where commerce and trade are reliant on the exercise of trust, modern commerce and trade holds that screwing the client, as well as the opposition and hell, why not?, suppliers too is the path to success. Where successful communication is reliant on the establishment of reliable paths of communication through the demonstration of a willingness to be honest, modern leadership practice is to lie as much as will convey the benefit (to the leadership, not the led). It is no wonder this happening: it is the generation now coming to power that has grown up having these values demonstrated to them on a daily basis. Their own lives have been successful in those terms, it's just a little sad that the longevity of the society is stripped in the rush for short term profit.

Pretty much right, except for the "not vote at all" bit. That's illegal here (at federal, state and local levels what's more) and earns you a fine or worse. Politics of fear come home to roost - once the mob is unsettled it'll take off in random directions at the merest scare. If the media is primed to make it's money from scare-mongering, you then have a recipe for very little cohesion and little capacity to achieve long term goals. It's happening all over.

'tis the law that is an ass. I think the lawyers would have had fun with this one (but still charged it). Genericized trademark. The legal team has to be seen to be making all efforts to protect the trademark or lose the trademark to the public domain and the account to another team.