Just FYI, if you’re using a pi bear in mind that they are still really bad at doing DVD menus (from backed up dvd iso files).

I’m not anti Pi (I own 4) and they seem to play everything else well (and openelec is the best pi version at playing menus on SOME dvd isos) but if like me you have many dvd isos (1000 plus) then its a deal breaker.

Any android versions of XBMC have the same DVD menu issues (which is a shame when (like me)you are looking for small cheap xbmc box).

For non pi/android options look at this thread on the XBMC hardware forum.

I have personally built (from the link above) The number 1 windows box and bought (arriving this w/e!!) the NUC based number 1 openelec box.

Also FYI if you are a netflix user you will want XBMC on a windows platform.

Then you get to try to decide what remote to buy(?) (helpfully the guy who started the thread above has info on that too)

It’s getting interesting – the PCS union is reported to be backing independence according to the Herald, and the STUC seems to be leaning that way too according to the Scotsman.

If you read the article .. ‘some’ bits of the PCS union have voted to support the Yes campaign (but then some have probably voted to support No and some have definitely voted to support PCS Neutrality), but the main vote by delegates representing their local areas has not been taken.

As such the herald report is just speculation, but I’m not surprised to see that some people on STW have decided that that means its a fact.

Gotta ask yourself, who has your best interest closest. Trade Unions, or Tescos.

Personally as a member I’ll be leaving if they decide to campaign for either Yes or No.

However, whatever the decision it will not be based on special knowledge about how independence will affect members, but just on the views of the members themselves (who know exactly as much as anyone else about the true costs and risks of independence.)

My recollection was that devo max was taken off the vote for the reason that interpreting the results might lead to some grey areas.

What if the result was that 90% vote yes for devo max and 50.0001% vote yes for independence.

What should the result be?

Devo max would appear to be the most democratic choice, but if the independence vote was also slightly positive that would overrule it.

So in the proposed referendum, the option with the greatest support might end up being ignored.

So why bother asking?

Like it or not, all or nothing gives a clearer decision, and prevents grey areas, no matter which side of the Yes/No divide you fall on.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

Epicurus 341 to 270 BCE

I’m very late to this thread, but I think that the best way to “defeat this xenophobia” is to give them no oxygen by explicitly avoiding double standards when dealing with people.

Sensitivity can be a good thing, but it can also lead to situations like this link to ex-muslim site[/url] .

TL:DR ex muslim (Nahla Mahmood) living in the UK is subject to threats to herself and her family from muslims, including an ex Lib Dem councillor.

Gets told that British police “can do nothing”.

If you want a lossless copy of your dvds (including menus etc.) you can rip to dvd image (iso) format using e.g. dvdfab, (free version will do this uncompressed in combination with imgburn)

You can then use xbmc on many devices to play the resulting files. Ripped isos vary in size from 4.5 to 8TB (for dual layer dvd).

mkv will be a smaller file and plays on more software but you lose menus and possibly subtitle options.
mkv also requires more attention if you are ripping tv show box sets and need to split and individually name the episodes.

I have 9.5TB at the moment (1000 movies and 80 tv series) as iso files……

Maybe I should consider transcoding to mkv myself 🙂

CountZero — I think the point that the non cat owners above have been making is that;

If cats are as you describe, and cannot be prevented from wandering the streets and killing themselves on the roads (really? you live in a house with no doors?).

Then cat owners should try not to get all animated, preachy and judgmental when their little furry poo machines never come home.

IANAL but someone told me that dogs are considered fully domesticated and you should report it to the police if you hit one, but cats are considered wild and you don’t have to (although it may be polite and nice to do so).

The level of criticism offered on here for suggesting that the owner of an animal might bear some responsibility for what happens to their pet if they allow it to roam freely shows just how loving and caring cat owners are.

If you’re that invested in the wellbeing of your little furry friend then try to help society at large by not letting it play on the road FFS. (This wee rule can also apply to the owners of children, dogs, horses, hamsters etc. etc. although they seem to need reminding less frequently than cat owners).

Utterly Utterly brilliant ….
AND if you are a Mythbusters fan – they are doing a BB special (out on Aug 12 in USA .. not sure when it hits the UK?)

(No … they’re not cooking blue meth 🙂

Horrible situation, and so sad.

It is sometimes legal to withdraw care and starve someone to death in the UK, but taking positive action to relieve suffering is illegal.

For those who say its complicated;

We allow the law to decide if contracts (or wills) are legal and truthful, and we allow courts and doctors to decide if people who commit crimes are/were in their right minds at the time.

If its possible go do that in the administration of legal contracts, and sending people to jail, then surely its not beyond us to work out a way of allowing someone to verify if they want to live or die?

For those who say its a “slippery slope” from legal to compulsory… I hope you are enjoying your gender reassignment, abortion, gay marriage (and all those other things that people claimed were part of a slippery slope when they were made legal).

obvious fraud is obvious.
Youtube link

Whats the name of those fundamental particles that get transmitted from the royal balls again?

Was it Kingons and Queons? something like that;

Some people say they don’t exist, but they _must_ be real.

Otherwise, what exactly makes these people different and gives them the right to rule over us all?

Hi bigyinn
FYI I believe that the “right on brigade” to whom you refer may have actually made the video. To highlight homophobia (and the pointless angst and fear of homophobic tossers).

Perhaps you need to watch it again.

Often seen things I couldn’t identify … but who hasn’t 🙂

I think that the most remarkable “UFO fact” is that back in the 70s and 80s when camcorders were relatively rare, much more (extremely ropey and fuzzy) “UFO” footage was recorded than today, (when most people have full HD recording devices in their pockets all day long).

You would think that if UFOs were genuinely weird phenomena, that the evidence would be mounting and the quality improving … but its not?

Weird eh?

I suspect a conspiracy!

7409 🙂
closest was 30km in florida

My 2 nephews (11 and 8 ) are always play fighting with their dad and attacking him unexpectedly (like Cato but smaller).

Just recently if he retaliates and tries to tickle them they’ve started start shouting “Jimmy!” and “Saville!”, to get him to let go 🙂

Hasn’t happened in public yet but its only time 🙂

Still going …
For me, this:

explains better than I can the way in which gods alleged influence and power has retreated in the face of reason.

All this talk of “days” vs “periods of time” in Genesis and the “careful theology” (thousands of years worth!) necessary to tell the difference between homosexuals and shellfish …

Well, its just very complicated scaffolding on a crumbling edifice.

The simplest explanation is that the whole of theology has no factual basis.

The weird thing is that the more complex and creaky the supporting “theological” scaffolding and doublethink required becomes. The more religious people start pointing at its complexity like its something to be proud of?

Its not; its just a series of desperate measures thrown up to support your irrational ideas, and smokescreen the fact that theres not really anything of any substance there to support anymore.

I would have some respect for theology and its promoters if they valued and promoted the clarity and explanatory power of its ideas, but the one thing they can never do is be clear.

edit .. forgot the point 🙂
education about the topic of religion.. fine
religious education [Nelson Muntz] HA HA [/Nelson Muntz]

To bring this back to the initial mention of the pope.

Does anyone else find it weird that when top religionists (the current ex pope and mother theresa spring to mind) are honest and reflect on their beliefs (pope in his speech and m.t. in her biography) they talk about how god often seems absent and how its all a bit of a struggle to believe.

Doesn’t that seem a bit weird?

Its like they almost realise the truth but can’t quite take the next step.

I could almost feel sorry for them, if it wasn’t for the other evils they’d perpetrated and supported in the name of their imaginary friend.

“but to revel in someone elses pain and illness is, frankly, repulsive”

According to you perhaps, but with respect, I’d like to revel at least a little.

The degree of my revelling will be proportional to the suffering caused by the organisation he represents and leads (according to my own moral values).

That is, I will revel approximately one hundred times as much as if he was Andrew Wakefield, and half as much as if he was Thabo Mbeki (other moral benchmarks are available).

(Its a tricky one, as the church is obviously responsible for more overall unnecessary death and suffering than Mbeki, but it seems unfair to apply all of the revelling for that to just one man).

I’m no expert but some relatives in Africa have a buzzer and switch wired to the mains to let them know when it comes back on. Seemed like a really neat idea but might be better for short daily power cuts?

Wow … just wow

ITT people who claim to be open minded about the evidence, but can’t tell the difference between evidence and what some bloke said on the internet.

There comes a point when it might be better to assume the deniers are trolling; because that is less depressing than the thought that they are real people using our precious precious oxygen.

I have decided to call this point the “trolling event horizon”.
Where trolling and stupidity meet and become so dense that they form a singularity and (hopefully) vanish up their own fundament.

Mr Woppit;

Anything that is no longer palatable or is patently untrue is allegorical.

Everything else is God’s inspired written word and is absolute truth.
Until it becomes allegorical.

I’m stealing that .. thanks for the best and most succinct summary of bible interpretation ever.

molgrips;
Does that involuntary knee jerking cause you pain?

To paraphrase someone I read on here a while back;
He has a face I would never tire of punching.

Bahco Laplander Folding Saw
/thread

Carl Sagan: The Demon-haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark

Far more subtle than dawkins god delusion, but the same effect (for me :).

edit : also John Diamond: C: Because Cowards Get Cancer Too

It is up to governments to sort it out, but the dealbreaker for me was the John Lewis chappie saying that long term they could not compete with Amazon in a market where JL were paying their full taxes and Amazon wern’t. So if something doesn’t change, the future is going to be worse.

For me, I’m a very good amazon customer, but I needed a washing machine this week and John Lewis got my business.

For smaller things I usually prefer to click on “fulfilled by amazon”, but from now on I’ll be looking for their smaller suppliers.

Its internet shopping, it takes almost no effort to avoid giving them your money (or just give them less).

If they start losing in sales the 10% (or whatever) that they are saving in tax, maybe things will change?

This article has an interesting view on how it came about.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/13/petraeus-surveillance-state-fbi

Looks like the surveillance state has bitten itself
(also some other references seem to suggest that the FBI agent following up the “case” was very anti obama.

Land of the free (my £rse)

I love the attitude that says the police must obviously have our best interests at heart and should be allowed whatever powers they thing they need.

It’s already been seen in this thread that despite not (I think) being able to pull people over for no reason, the police do it anyway.

Once pulled over, knowing your rights and trying to stand up for them, just means that you are more likely to end up being harassed and inconvenienced.

Do we even need to mention the UK “anti terrorism” legislation that lets them harass elderly hecklers at political conferences and arrest photographers?

I support the police, but sadly it appears that those who think the worst of them are often proven right, and that can’t just be a coincidence.

molgrips
“Whoah there, back up. Do you think that I am a religious person who is against gay marriage? Cos I’m not.”
Fine .. I’ll edit that to
“The fact that [religious people] don’t like it, and that [their] main defence is to demand “respect” (meaning silence from [their] critics) is not our problem.”

If all you want is to agree that we should be excellent to one another, then I agree 🙂

But (and theres always a but 🙂 )it does depend on the context in which people “mention it in passing”.

It’s hard to say without examples but if someone mentions it in the same way that they might mention being a trainspotter, birdwatcher, or singlespeeder, then fine.

But if they mention it as a surrogate for “I/We are special” or “You’re morally degenerate” or to in any way protect their views from critical analysis then all bets are off.

Perhaps its because a lot of the “anti’s” on here have been religious at some point themselves. As a result, they (we) recognise that religious people tend not to mention it at all unless they are trying to make some sort of point (however subtle).

molgrips
you’ve hit the nail on the head. I don’t agree with unsolicited abuse either. But it’s not unsolicited when you use your opinions to interfere with the rights of other people in a society.

Hold whatever opinions you want about any subject you care to fit in your head. (faeries, goblins, gods, elves, angels or unicorns). Do it with my blessing and with my guaranteed lack of interest and argument.

But don’t bring those ideas into a discussion about the rights of others unless you want rational people to look at the basis for your claims, point fingers and possibly have a bit of a giggle.

We are not talking about “unsolicited” abuse. You are really genuinely asking for it.

The fact that you don’t like it, and that your main defence is to demand “respect” (meaning silence from your critics) is not our problem.

molgrips :

Others have answered already but in in the hope that it might sink in – if you don’t want your views. criticised – don’t get involved in trying to defend them..

one way to do this is to keep them to yourself and not use them to try and deprive others of their right to to equality under the law. (which makes them everyones business)

as an aside its worth considering that if you cant defend your views rationally. then maybe it’s because they are actually wrong?

teamhurtmore….
“there are ways of doing it which are still respectful to others’ views”

Spoinnnngggggggggg!

You might not realise this. But when you demand “respect” for your religious views, people (maybe just me 🙂 see it as shorthand for this;

“I have no rational basis or evidence for my views. However, I demand that for the purposes of this discussion you ignore that and confine yourself to polite disagreement.
This works better, as avoiding any requirment for of “facts” and “evidence” makes it appear that all of our opinions are equally valid and we can all sit around and nod knowingly at eachother.

This will allow my beliefs to survive until, hopefully in time, there may be a religious revival, that will lead to your minority views becoming legally flammible once more, and we can dispense with all the respectful discussion and get back to the good old days.”

(PS I’m not suggesting that _you_ would really burn people to death. Just that people who share your particular beliefs have in the past.)

I have views (on morality and humanity and equality) which I hold dearly, but I will never feel the need to demand the kind of “respect” that hides them from discussion and exposure.

I don’t need to.

“We must respect the other fellow’s religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.
H. L. Mencken”

Just to help curb some of the random made up stuff on here.
It was the wifes license and shotgun. She handed it to her husband. I guess you could say he was using it under her supervision.

cynic-al .. Raining disapproval on a clear cut case of legal self defence doesn’t sit well with the winking smiley you put on your casual reference to punishment shootings by the IRA.

If they considered your crime big enough they did it from the back so that your kneecap would be lost and your chances of recovery much reduced.

Ho Ho.

I disagree with him, (given time to think he might disagree with himself, especially given the picture above) but the most retarded thing about this is the fact that the question was asked at all.

They don’t ask the rowers and swimmers what they think about the latest child drowned at the beach, they don’t ask F1 drivers about accidents on the A9 at post race interviews.

He looked ambushed and confused, and gave a poorly worded off the cuff answer. Sadly its now being played endlessly alongside news of this incident where a bus has killed someone.

If it transpires that the cyclist wasn’t wearing a helmet people are going to start heaping blame on the victim.

Thats very unfair to Wiggins (based on an off the cuff remark), and more importantly enormously unfair to the victim.

farm bent adj. descriptive of a berry who finds himself inclined to quadruped romance as a consequence of enforced rural remoteness.
(berry n. A sexual deviant, a kinky person, A goddam prevoit 🙂

butcher ..

As i was saying, absence of belief is not belief.
It is disbelief.

The fact that I don’t accept something that you do (based on what I consider to be a lack of evidence) does not imply that I therefore “believe” the opposite or indeed that I “beleive” anything at all.

Your choice of the word belief because it “treats everyone evenly, under one umbrella. As human beings.” Is exactly what I’m arguing against.

Your aim in defining belief as you do, seems to be to imply that:
I have a belief and someone else has a belief, therefore we have the same thing.

That is not the case. I do not “believe” in facts proved by science. (nor do I have “faith” in them). I am convinced by the evidence.

I can use those words loosely in that context (and many people do .. like you), but I object to it because “belief” and “faith” are bad words to use for something for which you have evidence.

I was really trying not to bite … but I’ve failed.

butcher
I do not think that word means what you believe it means.

No matter how much you believe it means that, it will not change the meaning of the word.

Absence of belief, is not belief.
Atheism, is not a religion
Failing to collect stamps, is not a hobby.
Baldness, is not a hairstyle.

It would be churlish to mention that the ease with which you change the meanings of words to suit your own arguments, and then imply that everyone who merely disagrees with your definition is some sort of fundamentalist grammatarian, is a perfect metaphor for what passes for reason in the rest of your befuddled brain.

From Evanton there are a few ways up.

Start at the path up to Novar Quarry at the back of Culcairn (NH606666)and keep going northwest. At the junction after you go under the pylons (NH599680) bear left and as you go west along the forest road, just about any right turn will take you up to the track along the top of the hill.
Popular turns include NH595677 (very steep) NH582670 (less steep) NH569682 (less steep again but longer).

Once on the path along the northern side of the woods make your way along north east (ish) to Fryrish.

Coming down is faster via NH596695 to NH601690 (uphill to) NH596685 NH595684 NH600682 and then back the way you came.

Be careful of the “Novar 2” windfarm building which is going on at the moment and has turned many of the forest tracks into motorways.

Not the last 2000 years. Only really discussed for the last 18-1900 since they made him up based on various attributes of other pre-existing 'gods' and 'saviours'.

EDIT > Happy Solstice :o)

I had a belkin one from 2-3 years ago and never got on with it. Really poor reception, (e.g. never got a strong enough signal to be found by autotuner on radio).

BUT .. I tried it again 2 weeks ago (due to new mp3 player) and found by chance that it works infinitely better if you turn up the volume a lot on the input device (mp3 player).

Tuner now finds signal easily and it drowns out some (distant) signals on the same freq. (I assume the signal is no stronger but more of it is made up of music rather than noise?)

Can't believe I didn't think to try that before 🙂 – Just gotta remember to turn it down before using earphones.