threegee

That's not a very efficient way to do it. Normally you'd use a graphics program (like Photopaint or Fireworks) to do this on your local machine. You could try uploading a picture to your a gallery you create here (using MyControls) then right clicking and saving the resulting resized images. There's a limit on the size of file you can upload though - somewhere around 2MB I think. You can make a gallery private or say which members you want to share it with. Plenty of free photo sharing sites on the web too, but beware of ones which charge to download full size images, you could find your own photos held to ransom if you mislay the originals. Also remember that a smaller file size and a smaller displayed size are not necessarily the same thing. You may want one the other or both. Encoded email attachments are a very inefficient way of sending data. If you've got more than a handful of photos, a slowish connection, or do this regularly look at peer to peer (P2P) file transfer programs.

Of course, how silly of me to forget?! Famous for cake decoration:- Ma-zappa'n

Well, the next 1000 didn't take so very long! BTW just got the glasses in an Elton John sale.

B*&***! Where do you get them from? Apple aped features of the Linux FS3 file system in the (appropriately named) Cheetah. They made a clean break with old code in order to do this leaving their users stranded - as per usual. Linux users had Compiz before Aero and Aqua. When you can freely browse someone else's source code for ideas it's so easy. Compare: http://www.abadiadigital.com/noticia1778.html Even going back to MSDOS things like pipes and filters were cloned from Unix and Linux. The original MSDOS was a straight rip of CP/M and Windows 1.0 an inferior clone of DR GEM (in GEM the Windows could overlap, but BG instructed staff that this was unnecessary! ). Very little originality has ever come out of MS considering the vast sums they spend. And much of what Apple does is others originality dressed-up. I've even heard on the media recently that Apple "invented" the pocket MP3 player. What rot! I had a couple of pocket MP3 players long before Apple entered the market. P.S.: Not being familiar with Lindows I just checked and discovered it's a trademark owned by Microsoft! Seems like they paid a fancy sum for it! :

F. Zappa? Did he invent the TV remote? What offends me is his usual insistence on using those damn silly AAA's instead of cheaper and easier to find AA's, that you can sit on far longer before they need changing.

They are all converging because they are copying Linux - particularly Apple!

Rock solid on this Ubuntu Linux machine. May not have noticed the improvement quite so easily if I'd had to reboot. But on closing and re opening browser after the upgrade the improvement in rendering was quite spectacular. Maybe its just a Linux thing or maybe it's now making use of multi-threading better. Doing some tests with a laptop last year I found that Ubuntu was something approaching 20% faster on file downloads that Windows XP, using the same hardware and same download sources. So it looks like the Windows TCP/IP stack isn't what it could be.

I don't think we have! Interesting to hear the hackneyed old sound bite about not shouting fire in a crowded theatre trotted out again - gets them every time! But THINK, how many people are stampeded because someone gets up and shouts "fire!". It doesn't happen in the modern world because we've learned about crowd behaviour and fire precautions. It doesn't happen not because there's a law against it (and there should be about giving out patently misleading information - politicians please note). It doesn't happen because of people's innate common sense. If there was mileage for mischief in doing it don't you think a hell-bent terrorist or loony would be regularly doing it? The real reason for the UK's restrictions on freedom of speech is that there are issues which should be aired that those in power don't want to touch. The reasons are historical, fear of communism and the rise of the trade unions, etc. We've unlearned what we were taught in the playground: "Sticks and stones..." Being frightened of ideas is the end of freedom (an absolute concept in itself) of speech and true democracy. As in the case of our manipulative Dutch MP, suppressing - and particularly in being seen to suppress these ideas - only gives them more power. We've have heard next to nothing about this if he'd been allowed to travel to the Lords and answer questions on the film. But he figured he wouldn't be, and dummies in government obliged him with the publicity he couldn't have bought.

When you quote other people it's generally accepted practice not to write the contents of the quotation marks yourself. Not yesterday - a very real danger that this bunch of incompetents are delivering the country into the hands of totalitarians at some point in the future. Though I think that some elements of this government would happily ditch their pretensions and take power in such a regime. He was only going to the House of Lords under invite. What precisely is the potential threat to disorder there? Are their Lordships going to riot, burn down the commons, or restore the feudal system? The real reason for banning him is what has been termed by some senior figures as "appeasement". So allowing a vocal minority that does not share our common values and wishes to overthrow our democracy, to dictate to the British People. Make a few threats - kill free speech - wow, we're well on the way to that Muslim state already! Ah, right then. So what you're saying is that they need to threaten disorder and we won't be able to ban them? Could it be that it's only the billions of taxpayers money that's being spent spying on these extremists night and day that's keeping their subversive activities in check. We need to be told the true cost of this little multicultural society social experiment. The monetary cost as well as the cost to our hard fought for freedoms. Glad you agree that it's a slight chance. This is a grossly incompetent government, on a scale we've seldom seen before. Now where's my copy of that thoroughly researched dossier on WMD? You know, the one prepared by security experts and government advisers that's so "informed" that we can confidently start a war over! In any event it's not about making calls it's about standing up for principals. I don't even believe what the Home Secretary has done is legal under European law. Your faith in ANY government is misplaced. Something that will start to occur to you with a little more experience of how the world really works.

Or maybe not? Could having a Jewish Home Secretary now have something to do with the latest banning? Or would any such claim be racist in itself? Then again we probably have to accept what The Muslim Council of Britain claims: That horrible reactionary and unreasonable right-wing David Cameron prevailed over the loony "liberal" left desire to let him come back. BTW isn't The Muslim Council of Britain supposed to be sugar 'n' spice and all things nice where this "multicultural society" thing is concerned? How could they possibly want to hear from, and encourage, a Muslim extremist? Doesn't all add-up, does it?

But those sensible decisions don't extend to excluding those who don't accept that everyone should have a right to a differing view, and demand that their culture should subvert our culture in our country? I think monsta is on about double standards. If this guy is highlighting those double standards then it's his fault and not ours? He's simply a foreign troublemaker then? What a gift to the far right from the loony "liberal" left! Seems to me it's the so-called liberals who sold us this "multicultural society" that are at the root cause of the trouble. They ignored all warnings, and shouted down, and unreasonably branded as racist people like Enoch Powell who warned what would come to pass.

Just had an auto-update on this machine to Firefox 3.0.6 and immediately notice its now much faster rendering web pages. Any other Firefox users getting the same impression?

If ever blame was due it's here. He can't dodge it on the usual grounds that it was an inherited problem. Unlike Norway he's p'd the whole of the North Sea oil bonanza away; likewise with the privatisation reciepts, gold reserves, taxation from the millennium boom (mainly his boom because he let both private and public spending get way out of control), and the influx of foreign money to the City of London. He's pretended (more likely deluded himself) that the good times were in fact bad times and that he could ballance the books over an ever lengthening (in his mind) "economic cycle". BTW this begs the question that if he really believed he'd abolished "boom and bust", how come there was a traditional economic cycle anyway? I mentioned his qualifications in the context of Pete saying he hadn't any. The point is that there aren't (and can never be) any academic qualifications for this type of job. Something those four senior bankers could have pointed out when asked about theirs at yesterdays show-trial! I'm not sure this is true at all. They are willing participants in the same game, and I don't hear too much unspeakable truth propounding. They are in a better position to call the system than ordinary electors and they don't. They could have use their local government power-base far more effectively. I haven't forgotten the Lib-Lab pack when they kept a former deeply unpopular and screwing-up Labour Party in office well beyond their sell by date. That blew any pretensions to want to break the mold in my eyes. Hey, get with the game! The rules are there only as guidelines as to what you can get away with. They are there to bend as far as your power and influence will allow (not far in the case of Joe Ordinary). In former times you, and everyone else, just knew when you'd been compromised. Fair didn't come into it; you quietly resigned with a minimum of fuss. Today everyone gets a second (and third) chance on stage. Mandy even makes a career of this in itself.

Well, yes, that thought had crossed my mind, and it would surely focus his/hers! If we kept the existing system of the party in power selecting the PM then what would happen is that they'd ensure that their leader had one of the safest seats - just as now. But, as Malcolm has raised before, the present system is a sham in that people generally vote for the person and this people's choice often gets subverted. Just look at Tony's recent promise to "serve a full term". I think that the real problem is that we don't have a proper head of state like other countries. The monarch dare not interfere in politics unless things are really desperate, and even then she/he holds back. The result is that the PM becomes far too powerful, and it's up to his own party to remove him/her when they are not up to the job. These are often the very people who are in his/her power of hire and fire, so the result is secret plots and public pretence. All-in-all a shockingly bad system that no sane person could have invented!

There's a fair bit of evidence that the BNP (or elements of the BNP) have been behind the recent strikes in league with the far left. This isn't at all strange as they are both anti-libertarian and after a centrally run economy. The differences are only in inconsequential details and semantics. It's always a very few people that make things happen, no more so than in our present emasculated UK democracy. And dismissing then both as tiny minorities who will never get power is a dangerous thing to do. As Mr Hoon and others show, when time get really tough all sorts of people you'd have considered moderates start to show their true colours and amazing alliances develop. The veneer of democracy is very thin in the UK. No one knows this more than the present incumbents who are **** scared of the possibilities of civil unrest if/when the economic situation gets worse. We've been in headless chicken syndrome for many months now, and the sad truth is that Gordon Brown is an extremely weak minded and gutless PM, in (sort of) control of a party of career politicians who couldn't run a proverbial in a brewery! But there are people (even in his own party) who will step in to fill the power vacuum when things self-destruct, and you shouldn't take anything they say at face value. They will also use any hook on power that is available to them, and stretch it past any supposed limit to retain power. Don't dismiss the possibilities of a totalitarian government in the UK it's very real. Look back to the posts on the Northern Rock crisis here. Would you have believed then that this prefaced the meltdown of the entire banking system? My own pessimism on the matter turned out to be more than justified. The point is that things are far more interdependent and than anyone can possibly imagine (look at how the First World War started). That goes for the threads on this board too, so here I will stop lest I start on about the state of the economy and the chances of a major depression.

No monsta, you'll undoubtedly be labeled as malleable material and will be presented with a nice shiny uniform. Until someone discovers that you attended that BNP meeting, and your file (they've probably got one on you already) gets dusted-off! Then as a dissident you'll need to be "re-educated" I'm afraid.

My perspective is history! Ignore it and you are doomed to re-live it! Even if you trust the people in power now, these powers get handed on to the next lot and the next lot. Sooner or later they will be used in ways you could never have imagined. My bet is sooner!

Many decades back I asked why we only had an election every five years, and it was explained to me that it was impractical for everyone to express an opinion more often than that. A lot has changed since then, so I'd like the opportunity of asking the leaders of the main parties that question again. I figure the answer now will be along the lines of policy needs to be given a chance to have an affect - it takes a long while to turn around a big ship etc. Quite the reverse of what you'll be required to believe about this or that change having an early affect, and that this or that was due to them and not to a previous administration. But the fact is that there's no need for a General Election as such these days. A much more responsive system would be if MPs had to stand for re-election every other year on a fixed date. This could be staggered so some part of the country got a chance to vote every three or six months. No need for opinion polls then, we'd know for sure what people felt. Of course it's not going to fly because there is no incentive for the people in power to introduce this. But in some other countries the head of state might put this to a plebiscite. If this was the only thing Charlie did in his entire lifetime he'd go down as a great monarch. This would provide the needed wake-up call for failing governments like this one and prevent the PM from keeping the country in limbo until it had a chance to seal his fate. Cromwell changed the system, saw what an eternal talking-shop, and morass of self-interest he had created, and then tried to roll the clock back. So did lots of other people - who then tried to make him king. Great man that he was he refused. Sad fact is that incapable people still grab at power and capable ones - realising the real problems - shun it! Both Clark and Cable are very capable people, but both likely in the wrong parties! They could change places and wouldn't have to make any compromises. On paper Osborn should be a very good chancellor, he's a great academic, but so far doesn't have what it takes to lead. I think he listens too much to spin doctors and is too frightened to make a boob than to assert what he believes in, a few years on he might just be leadership material. Someone say something about qualifications? Any political evolution seems to have stopped about a century ago. Apart, that is, for the slowly rolling grab at power by the PMs office. It wasn't too long ago that governments outvoted in parliament felt morally bound to call an election. Or anything which touched on civil rights and liberties required a specific mandate from the electorate. And, even joining a non-political, non-federal, "trading block" required a referrendum. Now when you are in, you are in, and no one can budge you. Not a scandal, not even being caught-out in a blatant lie to the electorate (you were wrongly advised). Only one small step to calling an emergency and postponing the next general election until (you say) the emergency is over. Has Gordon considered this yet? There's plenty to call a state of emergency about! No one I noticed from outside the Tony Blair party! The way things are going we'll all be keeping sheep, and goats, and pigs. With a government permit and under CCTV surveillance of course!

It's been obvious for some while that when you go though UK customs your details are being logged. Only country in Europe to swipe your passport through a scanner in my experience - other countries have a written constitution with real safeguards on privacy. This just formalises what we already know. You are already being tracked, and who is with you, is being tracked! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7674775.stm I don't fear terrorism Mr Hoon, but I do fear politicians like you! Tell me who brought us this "Multicultural Society" in the first place? Power mad politicians like you, and mostly in your party! What a terrific excuse to roll back a thousand years of fought-for freedoms in a decade or two. And in just the same way as you lied in your teeth to get us into an expensive war which took more British lives than any terrorist could dream of doing. What's more in the minds of any thinking person your meddling war is in great measure responsible for your terrorism excuse! To say the two things aren't connected is simple nonsense; do you honestly believe this yourself? Let's stop kidding ourselves that Britain is the cradle of democracy. It's the rapidly becoming the cradle of the totalitarian state to end all democracy for good. No other state in history has had the breadth and depth of controls that our UK government is in the process of imposing. Eat your heart out Joe Stalin, you've been outclassed by the Brits again! As history teaches us: Totalitarian states start out only to protect those they rapidly enslave; when the general populous wakes up to the fact that they are in one it's far far too late to do anything about it. Anyone who does anything to oppose the power-mongers automatically becomes a dangerous dissident or terrorist. Wake Up, England - it's a lot closer than you think!

Food chain? I'd always imagined "public service" as a food trough!

They shouldn't! Never said that. Developing a low-cost British launch capability can make money for the country, create jobs, and save the govt a packet on military satellite launches etc. Others are tied into high cost ground rocket based systems. We can turn the 1970's blunder around and do a much more cost effective job. It only needs a tiny bit of encouragement - a tiny tiny sum compared with what is being wasted on the 2012 Olympics, and with a lot longer term benefits.

Yep, I think quite a few people noted that particular sound bite. But it seems to mean something quite different to Gordon than to everyone else. BTW did you notice that the strikes were sound bited as "the wrong thing to do!" But at least they produced a hundred or so jobs out of Total - more than the billions he's splurged on digging himself in deeper to crisis have. He doesn't even understand the basic strategy when you find yourself in a hole; those two words of sage advice everyone else can quote.

Here's the flaw in socialism. If you give someone something by right then they don't appreciate it. What's worse they don't appreciate other people's rights, and there's no responsibility attached to those rights. Even leftie politicians now appreciate this - hence New Labour's love affair with the free market. There's another angle and that's that the service providers themselves - doctors and nurses in this instance - don't have a real relationship with their patients; it's just production-line healthcare; counting numbers and targets. When patients don't respect health workers this only reinforces their disenchantment with their vocation. If you are not getting job satisfaction it's morally OK to demand more money and to stop trying. Add into the mix the politician's dishonesty in not telling people that resources are limited and that this or that simply isn't affordable without damaging the general economy and you have the recipe for a more and more expensive downward spiral. There is a solution, but it's not capable of being expressed in a sound bite. Some sort of voucher system has to feature - even the possibility of giving some of your vouchers to someone in more need should be considered. There's now value placed on the supply end of the health service but not such constraints at the demand end. It's human nature that people will only appreciate something they have to give to get. I'm not talking just about money here - respect has to feature too! Promise the earth to get elected then look after yourself and your chummies. How can we break this mould when the system desperately needs to reform itself and has no incentive to? That's the real question!

Our satellites! 'Cos it's cheaper than paying the Americans or the Russians or the French, and it would provide British jobs when we need them. Not only that but we could show them how to do it properly, and earn the country some money at the same time. I don't think you've been paying attention at the back! He can't, he's got them firmly in ours! He only takes them out to give multi-billion handouts to fat-cat bankers so they can pay themselves bonuses for bankrupting the country (It's called not rewarding failure). How else do you think he's going to get a fat-cat job on a financial company board when he gets booted out spring next year, and his own party finally gets up the guts to ditch him?

I agree having to approve members posts in open forums is a hassle. Will look into it, BUT it's not worth loosing much sleep over as new software is on the way. Not quite sure exactly how this will move things on, or exactly when, except that it's more "youtubey type" embedded video friendly. Very tempted to write our own gallery code as I'm not at all happy about the support for that module.