Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Andy Williams

 At 17:38 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
 On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:22:49PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
   How can any socialist not feel that when it came to the crunch
  socialism was
   rejected by intelligent people who understood its principals and benefits
   intimitadly because they could see it would not work for modern Britain?
 
 Which intelligent people who understood it would that be, then?

 Take a look around you. This list, being representative of the Perl
 community, tends towards the intelligent end of the spectrum. And from what
 I've gathered from the conversations I've had with people here, the vast
 majority of us tend towards the left[1].

 Dave...
 [1] Cue indignant emails from the half-dozen of so right-wingers I know on
 the list :)

Yep... you can count me on that list...

Andy (preparing for all the insults under the sun for being a tory!)




Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Jonathan Peterson

At 16:41 13/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  At 15:27 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
 

if only the SNP covered the whole of the UK

Err, they do.

Insert rant about the obvious injustice of having Scotland vote on the 
affairs of England and Westminster but not vice versa


--
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

-- 
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Jonathan Peterson

At 17:58 13/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
At 17:38 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:

Which intelligent people who understood it would that be, then?

Take a look around you. This list, being representative of the Perl 
community, tends towards the intelligent end of the spectrum. And from 
what I've gathered from the conversations I've had with people here, the 
vast majority of us tend towards the left[1].

Plenty of merchant banks full of very intelligent people who aren't very 
socialist.




-- 
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Struan Donald

* at 13/05 16:41 +0100 Greg McCarroll said:
 * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  At 15:27 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
  On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:30:31AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/18866.html
Absurd, laughable and bizarre. What *is* wrong with the UK?
  
  Don't ask me, you elected 'em. And it looks like you're all stupid enough
  to do it *again*.
  
  troll type=politics
  I know, I know. Blair doesn't have a socialist bone in his body - it's been 
  a _most_ disappointing four years, all i all.
  
  But given that the Socialist Alliance are only standing in ~100 
  constituencies, there doesn't seem to be any credible alternative.
  /troll
 
 
 if only the SNP covered the whole of the UK

my experience of the snp is that the average supporter is a lot more
interested in 'getting rid of the english' rather than any of their
more useful policies. of course that doesn't neccessarily go for those
withing the party but given that independance is their whole reason
for existing[1] there must be some element of that in there.

struan

[1] why does that sound so much more cumbersome than the french
equivalent?



RE: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Cross David - dcross

From: Jonathan Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 9:41 AM

 At 17:58 13/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
 At 17:38 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
 
 Which intelligent people who understood it would that be, then?
 
 Take a look around you. This list, being representative of the Perl 
 community, tends towards the intelligent end of the spectrum. And from 
 what I've gathered from the conversations I've had with people here, the 
 vast majority of us tend towards the left[1].
 
 Plenty of merchant banks full of very intelligent people who aren't very 
 socialist.

Very true. But in my experience the IT groups of those hotbeds of capitalism
still contain _far_ higher percentages of left-wingers that you'd expect.

Dave...

-- 


The information contained in this communication is
confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient
named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  
If you have received this communication in error, please 
re-send this communication to the sender and delete the 
original message or any copy of it from your computer
system.



Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Jonathan Peterson

At 18:50 13/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:38:45PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
 
  Democracy is overrated. I think a meritocracy is needed. Perhaps 
 measured by
  Perl competence.

It's a fairly well-arguable stance that *any* form of meritocracy is a
reasonable system - certainly an improvement on, for example, a
hereditary (mon|poly)archy.

Nah. I think meritocracies degenerate rapidly into self perpetuating 
oligarchies. The current ruling set starts to define 'merit' such that the 
friends and co-conspirators and like mindeds of the ruling set remain in 
power. Wasn't ICANN meant to be a meritocracy?

Actually, a hereditary democratic chamber such as the (old) house of lords 
strikes me as being a pretty good system. Swapping 'randomly selected' for 
hereditary would be a small improvement, possibly. Swapping 'selected by 
Tony Blair after consultation with his own sycophantic smile' for 
hereditary strikes me as pretty  stupid, corrupt and evil. Cough.



-- 
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Sun, 13 May 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:

 * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  At 15:27 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
  On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:30:31AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/18866.html
Absurd, laughable and bizarre. What *is* wrong with the UK?
  
  Don't ask me, you elected 'em. And it looks like you're all stupid enough
  to do it *again*.
 
  troll type=politics
  I know, I know. Blair doesn't have a socialist bone in his body - it's been
  a _most_ disappointing four years, all i all.
 
  But given that the Socialist Alliance are only standing in ~100
  constituencies, there doesn't seem to be any credible alternative.
  /troll


 if only the SNP covered the whole of the UK



What the Sussex Nationalist Party - I dont think it will work somehow :)

/J\




like a phoenix from the flames

2001-05-14 Thread James Powell

The Perl Journal arrived this morning...


jp



Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread David Cantrell

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 09:51:37AM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:

 Actually, a hereditary democratic

hereditary democratic - an oxymoron, surely.

   chamber such as the (old) house of lords 
 strikes me as being a pretty good system. Swapping 'randomly selected' for 
 hereditary would be a small improvement, possibly. Swapping 'selected by 
 Tony Blair after consultation with his own sycophantic smile' for 
 hereditary strikes me as pretty  stupid, corrupt and evil. Cough.

swapping any politician for Tony Blair likewise.  Random selection for
the upper house seems reasonable.  Of course, just like with jury service,
people would desperately try to get out of it.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

  Rip, Mix, Burn, unless you're using our most advanced operating system
   in the world which we decided to release incomplete just for a laugh



Politics (was Re: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Jonathan Stowe

I just thought I'd remind you all that the last time talk here turned to
politics it nearly ended in tears before bedtime.  Please think before you
post anything potentially inflamable as I think there are a wider variety
of more strongly held views represented here than is apparent from the
usual content of the messages :)

/J\





RE: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Robert Thompson

  Swapping 'selected by 
 Tony Blair after consultation with his own sycophantic smile' for 
 hereditary strikes me as pretty  stupid, corrupt and 
 evil. Cough.

It's called confirming and strengthening your own powerbase while
undermining that of your opponent.

If we're not careful we'll end up in the situation where the TB has such a
strong powerbase that he'll be able to push through pretty much anything he
wants, riding roughshod over the the views/opinions etc of those who elected
him in the first place. Once it gets to that stage it's effectively a
dictatorship.

Rob
(preparing to be chargrilled as a democratic heretic)

---
New Labour!
We're the friend of business!!
We wont raise taxes!!
We will reduce bureaucracy!!
---


---
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of IBNet
Plc. 

This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.  Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete
this e-mail from your system. 

E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or
incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept
liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which
arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please
request a hard-copy version. 




RE: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Matthew Byng-Maddick

On Mon, 14 May 2001, Robert Thompson wrote:
 If we're not careful we'll end up in the situation where the TB has such a
 strong powerbase that he'll be able to push through pretty much anything he
 wants, riding roughshod over the the views/opinions etc of those who elected
 him in the first place. Once it gets to that stage it's effectively a
 dictatorship.

Umm.. why the implication that this *hasn't* happened yet?

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick  [EMAIL PROTECTED] +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/ +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
All language designers are arrogant. Goes with the territory...
 -- Larry Wall




Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Robert Shiels

From: Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 At 17:38 13/05/2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
 On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:22:49PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
   How can any socialist not feel that when it came to the crunch
  socialism was
   rejected by intelligent people who understood its principals and
benefits
   intimitadly because they could see it would not work for modern
Britain?
 
 Which intelligent people who understood it would that be, then?

 Take a look around you. This list, being representative of the Perl
 community, tends towards the intelligent end of the spectrum. And from
what
 I've gathered from the conversations I've had with people here, the vast
 majority of us tend towards the left[1].

 Dave...
 [1] Cue indignant emails from the half-dozen of so right-wingers I know on
 the list :)

I've always been pretty right wing, and as I get older I'm getting worse :-)
My prediction is that Labour will win again (a no-brainer I know), and that
the Conservatives will elect a new leader. Over the next 4 years, Labour
will fail to deliver their promises yet again, and the country will swing
back to the party of low taxes, who will be re-elected in 2006. I've been on
an NHS waiting list since before Christmas actually, Labour isn't working
for me.

Thinking about it though, most of LondonPM seem left-wing to me too, but
I've put that down to the fact that most are quite young. I am reminded of:

If a man is not a socialist by the time he is twenty, he has no heart.
If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.
-Winston Churchill

discuss :-)

/Robert




Re: see attachment

2001-05-14 Thread Greg McCarroll

* Matthew Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 
 (enter Birakay)
 
 Bikay: CHOPS! I come to defeat you both, old ones! My howitzer-up-arse
 Hereford attack will prevail!
 
 Bikay: Muahahaha! Your feeble strict style cannot defeat me! It is gay!
 

roflmao, damn that almost makes me want to go to the CHOPS central and
waste some time.

-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net



Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Matthew Jones

Robert Shiels:
 Over the next 4 years, Labour
 will fail to deliver their promises yet again, and the 
 country will swing back to the party of low taxes, who will
 be re-elected in 2006.

Part of the reason why they haven't delivered the promises that I think are
important (decent public services) is because they've hamstrung themselves
with this clueless tory low-tax approach. I genuinely believe that the
public are sick of watching the NHS, education system etc wasting away on a
starvation diet and would be willing to pay a bit of extra tax to make sure
that their kids can get schooled and that their sick can be healed.

As mentioned earlier in the thread by someone far more articulate than me, I
think the Labour Party lurched to the right just when the country was moving
back left again.

Let's face it, it's possible to say Labour isn't working, but after the
systematic dismantling of manufacturing industry, the fragmentation and
decay of our rail infrastructure at the hands of private companies who sack
thousands of track maintenance staff to increase profit margins, boom and
bust economics leading to the worst recession in decades, deregulation of
the cattle-feed industry leading directly to the BSE crisis that made
British meat an international laughing-stock/pariah ... I could go on ...
I'd say that conservative ideas worked a lot worse.

You can't expect public services that have seen two decades of alternating
neglect and red-tape frenzy, with a workforce that is completely demoralised
after being scapegoated for twenty years (What do you mean we've screwed
the education system - it's the fault of those loony-left teachers and their
'progressive' ideas!) to be turned round in four years, especially if the
government doesn't have the guts to make a hard decision and actually raise
the cash to do it.

You want to reduce waiting lists and class sizes? It all costs, people. This
election should be fought on exactly those lines:  low taxes and
ever-shittier public services versus increased tax and a national
infrastructure that actually works. And do you know what? I think that
people would choose the latter. I think that's what they chose in 1997 (not
so much I'm sick of the tories as I'm sick of the state in which the
tories have left the bnationspublic services) but Blair and chums thought
it was down to their economic bandwaggoning. 

I have deeply unfashionable political views, though. I think tax and spend
is a *good idea*.

-- 
matt | I mean to make you move with my planet infallible 



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Roger Burton West

On or about Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:45:45AM +0100, Matthew Jones typed:

I genuinely believe that the
public are sick of watching the NHS, education system etc wasting away on a
starvation diet and would be willing to pay a bit of extra tax to make sure
that their kids can get schooled and that their sick can be healed.

When have they ever been asked?

You want to reduce waiting lists and class sizes? It all costs, people.

Money isn't enough. America spends more on education per pupil than anywhere
else in the world - think that works?

Government-run projects don't work, even when they're heavily funded.

Roger



Re: see attachment

2001-05-14 Thread Peter Haworth

On Sat, 12 May 2001 16:38:08 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
 diff: usage diff [whatever] etc.
 - plan9 has a bad day

I keep meaning to ask, where do all these plan9 bad day quotes come from?


-- 
Peter Haworth   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Unicycling] in the mud is good for you. It builds character. Riding
 over slippery wet roots is also something everyone should experience.
-- John Childs



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread David Cantrell

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:45:45AM +0100, Matthew Jones wrote:

 Part of the reason why they haven't delivered the promises that I think are
 important (decent public services) is because they've hamstrung themselves
 with this clueless tory low-tax approach. I genuinely believe that the
 public are sick of watching the NHS, education system etc wasting away on a
 starvation diet and would be willing to pay a bit of extra tax to make sure
 that their kids can get schooled and that their sick can be healed.

Unfortunately, you have to remember that most people are idiots.  They want
all these services and they might even be willing to have taxes put up to
pay for them *but* they don't want to pay those higher taxes themselves.

This is why we should abolish democracy.

We need a benevolent dictator.  Obviously we can't vote for our dictator
(not only is democracy too flawed, but then it wouldn't be a dictator
either) so I hereby appoint myself.

I appoint Greg as my Culture Adviser and as head of the church.  Any
volunteers for my other minions?  Even if you don't want a cabinet
post, please feel free to volunteer as a Henchman.  You'll get 25 days
holiday a year, a nice uniform and a free Hench.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

  Rip, Mix, Burn, unless you're using our most advanced operating system
   in the world which we decided to release incomplete just for a laugh



Re: Long Dark Teatime of the Soul

2001-05-14 Thread Dominic Mitchell

On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 05:55:56PM +0100, Neil Ford wrote:
 On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 11:56:48AM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
  
  http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1326000/1326657.stm
  
 Unfortunately I got the phone call at 7:10 this morning :-(
 
 Definitely a strange day.

It got even stranger at the FreeBSD BBQ after this. :-)

-Dom (who has never seen wheelchairs used to stoke fires before)



Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread James Powell

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:23:50AM +0100, Robert Shiels wrote:
 
 If a man is not a socialist by the time he is twenty, he has no heart.
 If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.
 -Winston Churchill
 
 discuss:-)
 

How does that explain Garry Bushell and Jim Davidson ;)


jp



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread will

- Original Message -
From: Matthew Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 4:45 AM
Subject: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)


 Robert Shiels:
  Over the next 4 years, Labour
  will fail to deliver their promises yet again, and the
  country will swing back to the party of low taxes, who will
  be re-elected in 2006.

 Part of the reason why they haven't delivered the promises that I think
are
 important (decent public services) is because they've hamstrung themselves
 with this clueless tory low-tax approach. I genuinely believe that the
 public are sick of watching the NHS, education system etc wasting away on
a
 starvation diet and would be willing to pay a bit of extra tax to make
sure
 that their kids can get schooled and that their sick can be healed.

snip many words

 I have deeply unfashionable political views, though. I think tax and spend
 is a *good idea*.

Quite, It does irritate me when you do the calculations and it turns out
people are objecting to an extra £100 tax a year which could go towards
things like recruiting more nurses, teachers and more resources for the
public sector including areas like public transport.  For a start, if you
have more teachers and resources for schools then you have a better educated
workforce which means more industrys wanting to use your contry and
therefore less unemployment.  This means less burden on the government in
terms of welfare and more people to spread the tax over so you don't *need*
higher tax.

How do you suggest we train our workforce when schools (which are funded by
tax) can't afford more than a couple of rooms full of archimedes?





RE: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Matthew Jones

 I genuinely believe that the
 public are sick of watching the NHS, education system etc 
 wasting away on a starvation diet and would be willing to pay
 a bit of extra tax to make sure that their kids can get schooled
 and that their sick can be healed.
 
 When have they ever been asked?

During elections. Like I say, in 1997, the UK voted in a party that was (I
reckon) seen as the guardian of the public services, the party that is
traditionally associated

 Money isn't enough. America spends more on education per 
 pupil than anywhere else in the world - think that works?

Yeah, but doesn't most of that go on flak jackets for the teachers? Heh,
seriously, though, money may not be enough, but that doesn't translate to
the education system doesn't need any more money. What's needed is proper
funding, a modicum of professional respect to be handed back to the teaching
profession (there's a *reason* why there's a huge recruitment crisis in
teaching and nursing at the moment), and for successive governments to stop
meddling the system around with pet vanity initiatives designed more to
score political points than improve the system. The amount of work your
average teacher has to do has shot up because of this sort of scheme, but
the amount of time they spend in the classroom actually teaching *has gone
down*.

 Government-run projects don't work, even when they're heavily funded.

That's an awfully sweeping statement to make.

-- 
matt | I mean to make you move with my planet infallible 



RE: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Matthew Jones

 I appoint Greg as my Culture Adviser and as head of the church.  Any
 volunteers for my other minions?  Even if you don't want a cabinet
 post, please feel free to volunteer as a Henchman.  You'll get 25 days
 holiday a year, a nice uniform and a free Hench.

Minister for Perilous Boogiedowns, please.

-- 
matt | I mean to make you move with my planet infallible 



RE: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Robert Thompson

 This is why we should abolish democracy.
 
 We need a benevolent dictator.  Obviously we can't vote for 
 our dictator
 (not only is democracy too flawed, but then it wouldn't be a dictator
 either) so I hereby appoint myself.

Why not? The Romans did. The title of Imperator and Dictator were bestowed
by the Senate.

 
 I appoint Greg as my Culture Adviser and as head of the church.  Any
 volunteers for my other minions?  Even if you don't want a cabinet
 post, please feel free to volunteer as a Henchman.  You'll get 25 days
 holiday a year, a nice uniform and a free Hench.


Hmm, seen this somewhere before...

http://www.ruthless-world-domination.com


Rob
-
Pinky - So what are we doing today Brain?
Brain - We're going to take over the world Pinky
Pinky - Oh not again...
-


---
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of IBNet
Plc. 

This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.  Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete
this e-mail from your system. 

E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or
incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept
liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which
arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please
request a hard-copy version. 




Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread will

- Original Message -
From: Matthew Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 5:05 AM
Subject: RE: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)


  I appoint Greg as my Culture Adviser and as head of the church.  Any
  volunteers for my other minions?  Even if you don't want a cabinet
  post, please feel free to volunteer as a Henchman.  You'll get 25 days
  holiday a year, a nice uniform and a free Hench.

 Minister for Perilous Boogiedowns, please.


Can I be an overlord?  Or at least something prefixed by Arch- would be
good.




Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Roger Burton West

On or about Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:52AM +0100, Matthew Jones typed:

 When have they ever been asked?
During elections. Like I say, in 1997, the UK voted in a party that was (I
reckon) seen as the guardian of the public services, the party that is
traditionally associated

In 1997 the UK voted against the Conservatives. The policies being offered
by the parties were close to identical.

 Money isn't enough. America spends more on education per 
 pupil than anywhere else in the world - think that works?
Yeah, but doesn't most of that go on flak jackets for the teachers? Heh,
seriously, though, money may not be enough, but that doesn't translate to
the education system doesn't need any more money.

How about stopping and thinking about it _before_ throwing money at it
just for a change, then?

 Government-run projects don't work, even when they're heavily funded.
That's an awfully sweeping statement to make.

Yes.

Governments never get value for money on anything they do. Discuss.

R



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Jonathan Peterson

At 10:45 14/05/01 +0100, you wrote:

Part of the reason why they haven't delivered the promises that I think 
are
important (decent public services) is because they've hamstrung themselves
with this clueless tory low-tax approach.

Yup.

I genuinely believe that the
public are sick of watching the NHS, education system etc wasting away on 
a
starvation diet and would be willing to pay a bit of extra tax to make 
sure
that their kids can get schooled and that their sick can be healed.

For a very very unusual definition of 'bit'. Also, money is NOT the 
solution to schools (and prob. NHS). They don't suffer simply from under 
funding. Schools suffer from under funding, insane overegulation and 
bureaucracy, low public approval of teachers, increasingly stupid parents, 
and so on. These are deep problems with society that A penny on income 
tax will do nothing against on its own. For your amusement, here are some 
regulations that teachers have fun complying with, in addition to working 
long hours (standing up, mind) for bugger all money.

1. There is a law that specifies the minimum distance apart towel hooks 
must be in children's changing rooms.
2. A teacher can't be alone in a room with a pupil unless the door is open.
3. Teachers are responsible for children taking their medicine. If a child 
has a critical allergy to (bee stings, etc, etc) the teachers are 
responsible for administering intra-venous beta blockers etc. They don't 
get paid more for being nurses too.

Let's face it, it's possible to say Labour isn't working, but after the
systematic dismantling of manufacturing industry, the fragmentation and
decay of our rail infrastructure at the hands of private companies who 
sack
thousands of track maintenance staff to increase profit margins, boom and
bust economics leading to the worst recession in decades, deregulation of
the cattle-feed industry leading directly to the BSE crisis that made
British meat an international laughing-stock/pariah ... I could go on ...
I'd say that conservative ideas worked a lot worse.

Yes, in these instances. As regards agriculture, EU legislation has done 
far more harm than anything ever passed by any UK government, mainly 
because there's 10 times as much of it. In other areas (education, foreign 
policy) I'd say the right had better ideas and a better track record.

You can't expect public services that have seen two decades of alternating
neglect and red-tape frenzy, with a workforce that is completely 
demoralised
after being scapegoated for twenty years (What do you mean we've screwed
the education system - it's the fault of those loony-left teachers and 
their
'progressive' ideas!)

No, it's the fault of loony left legislators and their 'progressive' ideas 
:-)

I have deeply unfashionable political views, though. I think tax and spend
is a *good idea*.

Tax and spend isn't an idea. It's _how_ you tax and _how_ you spend. I 
don't mind the left wing notion of high tax and high spending. I mind the 
dumb way in which they spend it and (to a lesser extend) the dumb way in 
which they tax.



-- 
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




UK programmers left-wing? was Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Steve Mynott

Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Take a look around you. This list, being representative of the Perl 
 community, tends towards the intelligent end of the spectrum. And from what 
 I've gathered from the conversations I've had with people here, the vast 
 majority of us tend towards the left[1].

I think you are being UK-centric here and falling for the old
programmer myth that since its possible to program computers it is
also possible to engineer people and the economy, although the
experience of the last twenty years would suggest otherwise.

Libertarianism seems more popular than socialism on the internet as as
a whole, at least, with many American programmers.

It's my distinct (and probably biased opinion) that the popularity of
UK socialism has in long term decline since at least the late 70s and
early 80s.

There are certainly far fewer left-wing bookshops now than twenty
years ago.  Most of the young seem now more interested in single
issues like animal rights, globalisation etc then traditional
socialism.

Blair will probably be elected next month of a platform which at least
in some ways resembles Thatcherism more than traditional socialism.

-- 
1024/D9C69DF9 steve mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED]

as far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain;
as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. --albert einstein



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Matthew Byng-Maddick

On Mon, 14 May 2001, Roger Burton West wrote:
 On or about Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:52AM +0100, Matthew Jones typed:
  When have they ever been asked?
 During elections. Like I say, in 1997, the UK voted in a party that was (I
 reckon) seen as the guardian of the public services, the party that is
 traditionally associated
 In 1997 the UK voted against the Conservatives. The policies being offered
 by the parties were close to identical.

This isn't true. The policies being offered were different. However, the
Labour government then decided - having been elected with quite such a
large victory - that it could do what it wanted, so it changed all the
policies to the tory ones...

MBM

-- 
Matthew Byng-Maddick  [EMAIL PROTECTED] +44 20  8980 5714  (Home)
http://colondot.net/ +44 7956 613942  (Mobile)
All language designers are arrogant. Goes with the territory...
 -- Larry Wall




RE: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Matthew Jones

 In 1997 the UK voted against the Conservatives. The policies 
 being offered by the parties were close to identical.

For values of conservative that are low-tax/shitty services, IMHO. The
policies may have been close, but the perception of the two parties still
pointed at Labour as the party of decent public services

 How about stopping and thinking about it _before_ throwing money at it
 just for a change, then?

There's an old saw you can't solve a problem just by throwing money at it.
Well, sorry, but you can if it's a problem of underfunding. Try telling the
headteacher whose school roof is collapsing that you have to go and have a
good think about his problem before you throw money at it[0]. Perhaps he
could sack another couple of his teaching staff or get them to take a
further pay cut? There's the Conservative answer as I perceive it.

The fact of the matter is that many state schools are dreadfully short on
the following:

a) textbooks
b) computers
c) teaching staff

I don't think you have to spend an awfully long time thinking hard before
you see where the money needs to be thrown.

-- 
matt | I mean to make you move with my planet infallible 

[0] Of course, back in the day, his friendly neighbourhood Local Authority
would have just fixed it, but now he's grant maintained he has to pay for
everything himself.



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread James Powell

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:17:51AM +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
 On or about Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:52AM +0100, Matthew Jones typed:
 
  When have they ever been asked?
 During elections. Like I say, in 1997, the UK voted in a party that was (I
 reckon) seen as the guardian of the public services, the party that is
 traditionally associated
 
 In 1997 the UK voted against the Conservatives. The policies being offered
 by the parties were close to identical.
 
  Money isn't enough. America spends more on education per 
  pupil than anywhere else in the world - think that works?
 Yeah, but doesn't most of that go on flak jackets for the teachers? Heh,
 seriously, though, money may not be enough, but that doesn't translate to
 the education system doesn't need any more money.
 
 How about stopping and thinking about it _before_ throwing money at it
 just for a change, then?
 
  Government-run projects don't work, even when they're heavily funded.
 That's an awfully sweeping statement to make.
 
 Yes.
 
 Governments never get value for money on anything they do. Discuss.
 
 R

They certainly didn't get good value for money on the Immigration cock up,
handed out to EDS (or was it Perot) and then Siemens (with an army of 
contractors in tow).

Failures all down the line there, from the very juicy insider gossip I was
told.

jp



Re: see attachment

2001-05-14 Thread Simon Cozens

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:52:50AM +0100, Peter Haworth wrote:
 I keep meaning to ask, where do all these plan9 bad day quotes come from?

The plan9 fortune file. It's the mistakes they made while they were
developing it.

-- 
yes /dev/kmem  # Shutdown is broken. This'll have to do
- plan9 has a bad day



Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Robert Shiels

From: James Powell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:23:50AM +0100, Robert Shiels wrote:
  
  If a man is not a socialist by the time he is twenty, he has no heart.
  If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.
  -Winston Churchill
  
  discuss:-)
  
 
 How does that explain Garry Bushell and Jim Davidson ;)
 
point taken :-)

/Robert




Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Robert Shiels

From: Matthew Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 I have deeply unfashionable political views, though. I think tax and spend
 is a *good idea*.

I'm neither completely left, or completely right. I would be happy to pay
more income tax to improve health and education. I actually voted LibDem
last time as that is what they were pledging. I think eye tests and
essential dental work should be on the NHS. I think every school should have
a full-time IT expert instead of getting an already overworked teacher to do
it in their non-existent spare time. On the other hand, I have very
unfashionable views on some other subjects which I'll keep quiet about...

/Robert




Re: UK programmers left-wing? was Re: BOFHs requiring license

2001-05-14 Thread Dominic Mitchell

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:19:27AM +, Steve Mynott wrote:
 There are certainly far fewer left-wing bookshops now than twenty
 years ago.  Most of the young seem now more interested in single
 issues like animal rights, globalisation etc then traditional
 socialism.

Hey, that's just the young that get interested in anything other drugs
and playstations.

There's far fewer bookshops full stop.  Except for the chain bookstore
monsters.

-Dom



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Robin Szemeti

On Mon, 14 May 2001, you wrote:
 Robert Shiels:
  Over the next 4 years, Labour
  will fail to deliver their promises yet again, and the 
  country will swing back to the party of low taxes, who will
  be re-elected in 2006.
 
 Part of the reason why they haven't delivered the promises that I think are
 important (decent public services) is because they've hamstrung themselves
 with this clueless tory low-tax approach. 

Just because they can't deliver those promises for those costs doesn't
mean no one else can. If they knew they couldn't deliver within those
cost constraints why did they lie and say they could? .. and if they
didn't reallise they couldn't deliver at those prices, then it doesn;t
say much for their grasp of economics.

and what about the various promises that didn't cost money? .. like fox
hunting, proportional representation etc ... ??

does anyone happen to have one of those little plastic credit card things
they were giving out before the last election with 10 things 'let us be
judged on these:' .. 

-- 
Robin Szemeti

The box said requires windows 95 or better
So I installed Linux!



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Jonathan Peterson

At 11:17 14/05/01 +0100, you wrote:

Governments never get value for money on anything they do. Discuss.

The Louisiana purchase was a pretty good deal. So was Alaska. So was the 
Suez canal. Government subsidy of scientific research has possibly been a 
very good deal, it's hard to quantify. Government funded defence research 
seems to work reasonably well.

R

-- 
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




RE: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Matthew Jones

 Just because they can't deliver those promises for those costs doesn't
 mean no one else can. If they knew they couldn't deliver within those
 cost constraints why did they lie and say they could?

Because they are (right-wing) politicians. Just look at the absurd
promisises Hague's lot are making now and they're also talking about doing
it with even *less* money (UKP 8 billion, isn't it?) Besides, they have
(more or less) kept most of the promises they made. I was talking about my
disappointment that they didn't go further by raising tax revenue.

The tories are going to have low tax and pay for improved public services
through cracking down on benefit fraud, apparently. Gah, if only someone
had thought of that before. 'Cos you can solve a long-term underfunding
problem by skinting out a few dodgy crusties.

 .. and if they
 didn't reallise they couldn't deliver at those prices, then it doesn;t
 say much for their grasp of economics.

See my point about Hague's promises above. What does that manifesto say
about the conservative grasp of economics? For all their faults, New Labour
do seem to be far better at running the economy than the Conservaticve
party.

 does anyone happen to have one of those little plastic credit 
 card things they were giving out before the last election with
 10 things 'let us be judged on these:' .. 

Yeah, and I saw a breakdown along those very lines on Channel 4 news, which
conluded that although some of it has slipped, the vast majority was
achieved. However, later they ran a piece that I thought was familiar
because it had been a Guardian editorial, so perhaps C4 news may have a
certain slant going.

-- 
matt | I mean to make you move with my planet infallible 



Re: Politics (was RE: BOFHs requiring license)

2001-05-14 Thread Dave Hodgkinson

Robin Szemeti [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 does anyone happen to have one of those little plastic credit card things
 they were giving out before the last election with 10 things 'let us be
 judged on these:' .. 

That was a Mark Thomas episode wasn't it?

-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Interim CTO, web server farms, technical strategy
   



Re: Monitors

2001-05-14 Thread Simon Wistow

Lucy McWilliam wrote:
 
 On Fri, 11 May 2001, Mark Fowler wrote:
 
  (I don't eat chocolate.)
 
 *shock*

Me neither. I came to the startling conclusion about 5 years ago that I
don't really like. I don't hate it, just don't particularly enjoy it
except in odd moods and even then mostly dark chocolate.

I managed to have a day trip to Geneva on Friday and didn't buy any at
all.

 Do spiders make gravy...?

Yes. It just doesn't taste very nice, you need a lot of them to make a
decent quantity of stock and you keep finding bits of legs in your
Yorkshires.



Perl training

2001-05-14 Thread Leon Brocard

Quite a few people at perl mongers asked me about Perl training. Those
interested, please check out the following page, and please keep
replies offlist: http://www.iterative-software.com/training/

Cheers, Leon
-- 
Leon Brocard.http://www.astray.com/
Iterative Software...http://www.iterative-software.com/

... Real men write self-modifying code




RE: Perl training

2001-05-14 Thread Matthew Jones

 http://www.iterative-software.com/training/

Can you do another Perl course, please? 

CHOPS programming:

What's in the box?
This two day course is aimed at l4me to virtually pubescent Perl
programmers. We aim