Self abusing operators fail to offset emissions
Sort of NSFW, if you try hard
We all learned that when things look too good to be true, it is because they probably are. Planting trees to offset carbon emissions? Not going to save the planet.
As the article said "...first thing we need to do is to burn less"
Well humans "burn" fuel (Tofu, or Cheeseburgers, take your pick). So to "burn less" we should starve, or something. So, all those starving people in out of the way places are helping global warming.
Of course something similar was already proposed as "A modest proposal" by someone else a few years ago (1729 as I look it up).
Hmmm. Time to put the beer glass down, perhaps?
Rather an unfair criticism, since the point of planting trees was to reduce atmospheric CO2 - seen as a major cause of global warming - not to directly reduce warming.
Bit like buying a dishwasher then complaining it didn't do your socks very well .
Shame about that carbon offsetting thing not working so well, because by the sound of a report from greenies at the Energy Saving Trust, we're going to need to do something, as the number of gadgets we buy continues to climb:
How much power would be saved if all the hippies in the world just jumped off a cliff one day soon? I'm sure that'd buy the rest of us another 10 or 20 years and the real bonus is then we wouldn't even need to ignore them they just wouldn't be there!
If the USA isn't cutting output by any great margin, and China and India are only increasing their output of green house gasses wtf does it matter if I own a god damn plasma tv? Hippies should get with the program and live it up while they can, and one thing these people often miss is that there are two things human beings (well those in the northern hemisphere at least) are increadibly good at. That is A: fighting and B: coming up with ways to survive.
Browser compatibility issues plague and perplex people trying to use Virgin's GetMessage service
as I write its currently working in firefox 2.0 but not IE6, the opposite of the main story ;o)
Well, not so much the opposite as exactly the point of the main story. But we'll let it pass, as it is nearly Christmas.
Since Internet Explorer is well-known to be less secure than Stalag 17, it appears on the face of things that Virgin Mobile desires to surreptitiously install malicious software on the computers of people attempting to download photos.
Is there any other valid reason for requiring the use of a major security hole?
I've been sending them moaning emails about GetMessage for ages. First time I tried it, it only worked on Firefox. Then it didn't work on either Firefox or IE after they "upgraded" it. Finally... I gave up.
Again, we consider the shocking possibility that strapping oneself to a rocket and heading for orbit is potentially risky behaviour. The FAA sets out rules explaining just how informed of this space tourists need to be:
Frankly, I'd rather hop into space than on some bus trips I've been on. At uni, one particular driver was notorious for his aggressive driving. Of course, his attitude might have been made worse by 200 drunken students singing "You Fat B*stard" at him when he decided not to open his doors until we'd formed an orderly queue one evening. Fat chance. Peter
It occurs to me that anyone who considers that strapping themselves into SpaceShip One's successor is not a risky activity probably has more serious problems. Then again, lawyers have accepted The Bleedin' Obvious as an adequate defence for not passing on a warning, so I can understand why the FAA has mandated this.
Weird explosions a long way off have confused NASA scientists. You offer what we think is a decent explanation for hybrid gamma ray bursts:
I have a sneaky suspicion that these explosions are the results of terrible wars a long time ago in galaxies far far away. K.
Now this is why I love astronomy so much - there's always something new, something that the experts will cheerfully admit they have no idea how to explain.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosphy."
Finally, you asked "How much did they pay you to plug their aural assault?
Dear lord, even the 'after' clips made me want to hack my ears off with plastic safety scissors. My tone-deaf Great Aunt could produce better music than that, and she's been dead for 30 years.
Yours, shocked and appalled, Tom
Bill replies: I wish: I just had to suffer the indignity of trying the software myself, though at least there was no one else around at the time.
Considering my voice has been unfavorably compared to Jeremy Hardy's I thought the software did a remarkable job, though I would agree it still sounded terrible.
And on that note (geddit?) we will wish you a merry Christmas. Back with more of your letters in the new year. ®