"speaking against class privilege, now...",
"anybody talking against mass immigration...will easily be classified as 'hate speaker' too" - please cite a single law of any European country classifying those as hate speech. Up until then I'll say you are spouting utter rubbish.
>please cite a single law of any European country classifying those as hate speech
That's utterly naive, don't you think? They don't have to specifically classify those as hate speech. They just have to make the law vague enough -- and then the "offended parties", activists and other over-sensitive folks jump to take the opportunity.
"""In England, Wales, and Scotland, the Public Order Act 1986 prohibits, by its Part 3, expressions of racial hatred, which is defined as hatred against a group of persons by reason of the group's colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins. Section 18 of the Act says: A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
(a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby."""
"can it be any more vague" - easily; it's quite clear to me: don't spout fascist sentiments that are likely to result in violent hatred. I wouldn't want to live anywhere where, by omission of such a law, such speech is encouraged.
"Here's an example" - good: I don't believe you should be able to make and distribute a film equating an established world religion with nazism.
>"Here's an example" - good: I don't believe you should be able to make and distribute a film equating an established world religion with nazism.
Then you are a little fascist youself: you want to impose into people what they can and cannot say.
Not to mention, nazism is a historical phenomenon. Same as the slaughters of millions in the name of various Gods. So why shouldn't anyone equate an "established world religion with nazism"? If anything, some religious wars killed more people than nazism did -- or at least affected and enslaved larger areas for far far more years -- millenia even.
Yes it could be more vague, an amendment of that act means that section 4a now includes:
"""(1) A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he— (a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or (b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress."""
It's only acceptable to use "she" if the character in question is positive. Using "she" or stock photos depicting females to refer to a negative character is sexist.
I hope that you're speaking tongue in cheek. I mean, I am almost sure you are, but in the past few years the Internet has made my eyes rolling with all the silly code of conducts and special rules.
We seriously have jumped the shark as a species with this stuff. I'm hoping it's just the latest fad of the politically correct "party".
Oops. Thank you so much. I've corrected the error(s). I got so excited that I was bashing away on the keyboard and must have misspelled heroin and it autocorrected to heroine. I think I need to relearn how to type with Mavis Beacon, haha.
I would see nothing differently. I would still seek to educate other devs to experience other languages so they might change this problem you've pointed out.
Paxman can be quite aggressive, and I would say justifiably, with politicians trying to avoid answering a question. For another side of Paxman see this interview with Christopher Hitchens - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00r2c42
The title of the blog is ... "Linux Blog" and the author may very well have no time/resources/desire to check whether his writing is also applicable elsewhere.
No. Sorry, had to work with Drupal 6 for 2 years. Made me quit my job. That's one hell I want to avoid, even when they do switch to symphony. No hard feelings.
At one place I worked a number of years ago, one of my colleagues, who was always the first one there in the morning, had the job of getting Drupal running and some extension/module/plugin/whatever installed and hacked up in order to carry out some task. He was not really happy with it, to put it mildly, but managed to get things working.
When I left the company, I set up a cron job on my computer to randomly play an .mp3 of me saying DRRUUUUPPPAAAALLL during the early hours of the day when he was there. I guess he just about wet himself the first time he was sitting there alone and heard it, the way he tells it.
I use KDE because I like my desktop set up the way I like it, not the way some developers think I should. (also Yakuake's, KDE terminal emulator, "Open window when the mouse pointer touches the screen edge" has become such a second nature to me that I keep shoving the mouse to the top of the screen even if I'm on someone else's machine)
Also, KDE has kickass support for multi-monitor setups and works and looks the best on big resolutions. This, and the possibility to configure the DE the way I want are the two most important reasons why I love KDE.
...until you try placing a vertical panel on an a desktop edge adiacent to another monitor ...an trying to find wtf is happening, you discover the developers will never fix it because they don;t consider it a bug, it's just the standard behavior of some component down the wm stack ...freakin awesome
