Jump to content

Waldo

Members
  • Content Count

    6,049
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Waldo

  • Rank
    User Registered
  • Birthday April 23

Recent Profile Visitors

811 profile views
  1. Also, being consciously aware (i.e. detecting) of a thing, is not analogous with being influenced by it.
  2. If you're using the app on a smartphone, it doesn't need a network connection. It will give a simpe three word location based on your GPS position and a (stored within the app itself) word-list. If you're able to call emergency services on your phone, the app should work fine and you'll be able to report your three word location.
  3. Interesting. For some reason, an element of this reminds me of the "million dollar pixel" website a few years ago. Anyhow... Wondering if it would have been better for the emergency services (world wide) to collaborate and create their own system like this? Not sure how I feel with this being a for-profit thing. Will they make the algorithm and word-list for converting gps location to 3 words, public?
  4. Agree with this. I imagine a public information campaign re: the importance of focus and attention while driving, and highlighting some common distractions, would be far more effective than outlawing hands-free phone usage and trying to police that.
  5. It's in the same category of "having a hands free conversation with another person who isn't sat in the car with you". Which is, as I understand it, what they're saying is dangerous. I believe you're right though, police etc, will be exempt, and they'll make up some reason why it's safe for them, but not us.
  6. They're saying hands free phone calls, while driving, are now not safe! (has been on news today, sorry don't have a link or soure). Just wondering how the police and ambulance service will cope without being able to stay in voice contact with base, while driving?! I mean, if it's not safe for the public, it's not safe for people at work? Surely?
  7. Yes, that, and the fact that Lloyds HQ seem to be condoning this behaviour and aren't going to do anything about it?
  8. A lot of information on this thread is out of date. There are still loads of great chess clubs in Sheffield, and even if you're not interested in playing 'league chess', I believe most will cater to casual fun chess. Woodseats Chess Club and Ecclesall Chess Club, both meet at The Abbey, on Chesterfield road in Woodseats (Woodseats on Mondays, Ecclesall on Wednesdays). Darnell and Handsworth, meet on Monday evenings at the Stradbrook Community Center, The Nomads, meet at the Trades and Labour club on Duke street, Tuesday evenings. Hillsborough CC, meet at the Barrack Tavern, Monday evenings. Also clubs at Aughton, University, SASCA and more, here: http://sheffieldchess.btck.co.uk/Clubs
  9. Very slow mobile video game developer.
  10. It's not at all ridiculous to say the smell is unpleasant. On the rare occasion I catch a whiff, I find it somewhat unpleasant, and I used to smoke so much of the stuff as a youth I positively reeked of it. I'm in favour of legalisation, but wouldn't want to see everyone smoking it in public.
  11. Also our 'special relationship' with the US (who seem to be the ones who are most keen on ratcheting up the pressure on Iran) is a bit concerning. It's almost like Uncle Sam snaps his fingers, and we say "how high"?
  12. Appologies for not reading though this thread before posting; I'm pretty sure someone will have raised this before, but... I'm trying to understand how we're not being hypocrits here. I mean, it's okay for us to capture their tankers, but not the other way around?
  13. Not really into cricket, only watched the last hour or so; but wow, that was a bit gripping! Loved it.
  14. Sorry, I was trying to say that pro views expressed here, do not need to be backed up with scientific evidence, while anti views do. I am not disputing the value of vaccinations to humanity, or that there is plenty of scientific evidence to support this. Still, I'd be interested to learn if a comparable amount of time and effort goes in to looking for harmful consequences? We should focus as stongly on the downsides as the upsides; not just focus on the upsides because we can make money from it. I'm just pointing out that it's taboo to consider the possibility of any harmful consequences and to adopt anything other than a unquestioning "rah rah rah, this is nothing but comptetely wondeful, no downsides at all" mindset.
  15. Of course, it's a private business, and they're perfectly at liberty to shut down free debate and push whatever agenda they like. I completely accept that. One problem with suppressing nut jobbery though, is when it's done in such a way as to also surpress more reasonable inquiries in to the negative consequences of a thing. I think that may be happening here, both on this thread and in the wider context (debate of this topic elsewhere on the internet). Also, the negative consequences of this particular thing, cannot be expressed or considered without supporting scientific evidence of their validity; however, the same requirement is not imposed on expression of its positive consequences. Therein lies the imbalance.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.