Well, Schipol airport welcomes visitors to Amsterdam with the slogan "Welcome to the City of Sin". I guess Amsterdam in particular attracts a certain kind of tourist.
I've spent some time there, but I spend most of my time in Holland in Haarlem. This year i'm bringing my car and I'm making a beeline for Utrecht and Den Hague. It's been years since I have driven on the wrong side of the road, literally, at the first junction I got to in Calais... I'm sure i'll do better this time :P
I've spent some time there, but I spend most of my time in Holland in Haarlem. This year i'm bringing my car and I'm making a beeline for Utrecht and Den Hague. It's been years since I have driven on the wrong side of the road, literally, at the first junction I got to in Calais... I'm sure i'll do better this time :P
You do your country down, it's a lovely place and there's more to it than drugs. De Efteling und Den Bazaar for starters, I've been to Holland quite a few times and I still have a few more things on my bucket list
. The UK LFS Kart Meets are always well attended, and drugs aren't even legal (although as with every country in the world ever, as readily available as they are in the Netherlands).This might make me sound uncool, but I've never done drugs in the Netherlands. I don't see the point. I could get them here.
oh crickey I remember the LFS meet at the Southampton one, where it transpired that I'm rubbish!
The only time I play iOS content is when i'm on a flight, so I tend to be happy with demo versions as I havn't done long haul in years. Aside from that caveat, no I dont care if the cars & tracks are real or not - for me it's all about gameplay... Let me use race craft to battle other cars and I'm happy, that's why when I played racing games I went for LFS - a multi-player race game.
They artificially limited the size of the galaxies, and how many galaxies there were, when they launched the first 8-bit version, following a recommendation from the publishers not to make the world seem random even though it was all fractals.
A recommendation from a friend on a forum which has long since faded away, the forum was a small community of skilled programmers - a sort of hackers bar if you like. It was meant to contain the best programmers on the indi scene at the time but died a death for two reasons:
Firstly, few people in that community needed help so the forums were quiet.
Secondly, games like LFS blew the little sim I had been working on out of the water - and I figured i'd give up writing games and go back to playing them.
I am now writing games again, i'm just not bothering to do a racing sim :P
Firstly, few people in that community needed help so the forums were quiet.
Secondly, games like LFS blew the little sim I had been working on out of the water - and I figured i'd give up writing games and go back to playing them.
I am now writing games again, i'm just not bothering to do a racing sim :P
Well although it's within the topic title, I think we're derailing the OP - so i'll respond on FB.
I'm doing Holland again this year, but not until later in the year, and I don't think I'll go any further south then Den Hague or maybe Rotterdam.
If you fancy it TVE we could meet up over there? I was going to bring the TT and tear up the Dutch roads. I'll be staying in Haarlem just outside of A'Dam.
If you fancy it TVE we could meet up over there? I was going to bring the TT and tear up the Dutch roads. I'll be staying in Haarlem just outside of A'Dam.
Never use "fame" as a bargaining chip. Instead, perform the acts which justify fame.
well I was going to post constructively but it hardly seems worth the effort now.
Far too much going on in my life these days to play a game that requires practice like LFS does, for my kicks lately I have focused on writing my own game rather than modding other peoples but it is hard to fit that in around all the work commitments I currently have.
I still loiter though, and much like the OP I've no wheel to play with anymore and I never got in to driving with keyboard.
I still loiter though, and much like the OP I've no wheel to play with anymore and I never got in to driving with keyboard.
All anti-virus anti-malware software is rubbish, they just use md5 hash checks. The malware authors have been getting past that for years by using polymorphic installers and the anti-virus community has not yet managed to deal with that.
The problem is Windows.
The sad part is that there's no money in browser jacking anyway, if you speak to the people who've done it. Unfortunately for as long as people think there is money in it then they will try.
The problem is Windows.
The sad part is that there's no money in browser jacking anyway, if you speak to the people who've done it. Unfortunately for as long as people think there is money in it then they will try.
I can't think of anything software-wise which could help protect your password, unless you keep passwords stored on your computer and want them encrypted. The main thing to remember about passwords is $ymb0ls do not help. There are three simple ways to steal passwords.
One is a keylogger, so no matter what you type if you have malicious software on your computer it could steal your password that way (they can also read copy/pasted data), and login fields are easy to detect on web pages. Which is one reason why when I code software I always have random internal names for username and password entry fields.
The second is brute force, and symbols do not protect you here. The only real protection is length.
The last is packet sniffing, this is more complex but is often used in corporate espionage. In this case using a secure connection (https) rather than http is a simple and effective form of protection.
Seeing as I have the kitten song on a t-shirt (as posted by Seb66), I'd say I'm a cat person
:cat3:
:cat3:
When I see the word ego I kinda expect you to be talking about me, but as you aren't talking about me I lost interest.
The video seems an extension of Freudian concepts of psychology, which are all wrong. He was a landmark, but in a modern context he brings nothing to the table.
The video seems an extension of Freudian concepts of psychology, which are all wrong. He was a landmark, but in a modern context he brings nothing to the table.
That chart is great, it conveniently concentrates on salaries, thereby making it look like the rich are paying for our every whim and need.
How about a chart that shows the percentile contributions versus incomes of those spending time in the UK (seeing as you cannot use residency when considering the tax affairs of the super rich).
How about a chart that shows the percentile contributions versus incomes of those spending time in the UK (seeing as you cannot use residency when considering the tax affairs of the super rich).
Well it wasn't stated as a scientifically testable fact, but centre-left parties have been getting elected and then swinging to the right for quite a long time now :P Certainly polls and discussions here on this forum in the past have shown most of the Brits showing a left of centre, slightly anarchistic political disposition.
Out in the real world the only conservatives I meet are business owners or Baptists (or other Christian denomination, I live in Northamptonshire though so mostly Baptists) - which combined would be less than 25% of the population.
I realise that Conservatives gain votes from elsewhere, but I think that is because so many people think all politicians are about equally evil and swing their vote based upon how popular the current government is with the press.
So whilst I wouldn't say that my original statement was absolute fact, I do think there is a sizable proportion of the population who would fit that description - and my original point was that this demographic - despite its size - is not represented in politics, because everytime we vote people in who claim to represent us they swing to the right like a lead filing to a magnet.
Are Britains top 1% of earners actually paying UK taxes then? Or is the top 1% of payers actually comprised of the nearly-elites?
Or put another way, is our tax system taxing those who reap the biggest rewards from our economy even remotely accurately?
A large proportion of people earning 7 digit and higher incomes have paid less tax than me. Jimmy Carr to name but one...
I dont know if I agree that self employment should be a disqualifying factor in getting elected.
I'm self employed but my business is small. I have a day job too, and I employ a part time member of staff. My business interests represent somewhere around 30% of my income. I don't think my business interests are likely to ever change my view on policies, if anything my political views are more likely to result in me organising my own commercial interests as a co-operative rather than a top-down model.
More specifically, most of my income comes from a day job - I am a middle class worker not too dissimilar to most of you.
What if my business grew, is there a point at which we say that my business is now too much for me to be political?
That just doesn't add up - although I would accept and agree with Kev that being on the board of a corporation is a definite conflict of interest. But how do you define that point at which it isn't okay to be in business? Or do you just say that places in government are only for the working class?
I'm not being funny, but there is a sizable proportion of the working class who actually read and believe what it says in the Daily Mail and think that it is a newspaper - and that illegal immigrants get houses, cars, don't work and have luxury lifestyles and cause cancer in the rest of us.
I'm not saying the working class can't or shouldn't be in office, I am just saying that I politically disagree with some view points prevalent within the populace... Who would represent me? Well most likely it would be a politician who is a socially responsible member of the middle class - where I am...
By the same token isn't it fair then that the wealthy also have some representation? I grant you that the current system disallows anyone without substantial wealth or anyone who does not plot policy from those with substantial wealth from getting in to power and that is wrong - but in the ideal DEMOCRACY the government should be representative of the people, and you just cannot ban a class of people from being represented.
I think 1% of the seats should go to the 1% of the population who are posh twats, so that they get their voice. I don't want to ban them, I just want them proportionally represented instead of being in control.
I'm self employed but my business is small. I have a day job too, and I employ a part time member of staff. My business interests represent somewhere around 30% of my income. I don't think my business interests are likely to ever change my view on policies, if anything my political views are more likely to result in me organising my own commercial interests as a co-operative rather than a top-down model.
More specifically, most of my income comes from a day job - I am a middle class worker not too dissimilar to most of you.
What if my business grew, is there a point at which we say that my business is now too much for me to be political?
That just doesn't add up - although I would accept and agree with Kev that being on the board of a corporation is a definite conflict of interest. But how do you define that point at which it isn't okay to be in business? Or do you just say that places in government are only for the working class?
I'm not being funny, but there is a sizable proportion of the working class who actually read and believe what it says in the Daily Mail and think that it is a newspaper - and that illegal immigrants get houses, cars, don't work and have luxury lifestyles and cause cancer in the rest of us.
I'm not saying the working class can't or shouldn't be in office, I am just saying that I politically disagree with some view points prevalent within the populace... Who would represent me? Well most likely it would be a politician who is a socially responsible member of the middle class - where I am...
By the same token isn't it fair then that the wealthy also have some representation? I grant you that the current system disallows anyone without substantial wealth or anyone who does not plot policy from those with substantial wealth from getting in to power and that is wrong - but in the ideal DEMOCRACY the government should be representative of the people, and you just cannot ban a class of people from being represented.
I think 1% of the seats should go to the 1% of the population who are posh twats, so that they get their voice. I don't want to ban them, I just want them proportionally represented instead of being in control.
To reform parliament properly you have to reform the money - as it is the money that corrupts.
To get elected you need money, to get money you have to entertain lobbyists, and it is the lobbying that leads to corruption and stupid laws like the Digital Economy Act.
My approach would be to ban private financing of political parties. Airtime would be given on television, radio and print automatically for a political campaigner - with some proportion of airtime division based upon size of the vote at previous elections.
The next problem is the party whip system. With every member of a party voting the same in accordance with their party whip the problem is that the MP's no longer represent their local population. This is not the purpose of having a regional representative.
I would make the party whip system a criminal offense, and all parties using a whip subject to heavy custodial penalties. MP's should represent the people who voted for them and not their party political line.
The recent years of British politics have left me very disillusioned. Every time I vote for a left of centre party (and most of the British populace are left of centre) they go and swing to the right the moment they get in to power. It happened with Labour, and it happened with the Lib Dems.
Currently I am considering a vote for the Green party, their manifesto is the only one I can bring myself to vote for ethically - although I know some of it is impractical and would not be financially viable, the spirit of it is good.
All the 3 major parties in Britain are right of centre, they are part of this new breed of "social Conservatism" where on the face of it they promote this "social" frontage - pretending to be ethical and interested in the people, and yet behind the scenes they abolish things like the NHS equalities commission for being "too much red tape" and replace it with an organisation that ensures the interests of equality and diversity do not hinder with the "fairness" of the white wealthy man to make money out of the system.
I voted for AV in the referendum but only because PR was not an option. We should have been offered PR. A coalition is not a weak government, a coalition is a government that has to consider the views of others before getting it's own way on whatever it wants, and that is a good thing.
To get elected you need money, to get money you have to entertain lobbyists, and it is the lobbying that leads to corruption and stupid laws like the Digital Economy Act.
My approach would be to ban private financing of political parties. Airtime would be given on television, radio and print automatically for a political campaigner - with some proportion of airtime division based upon size of the vote at previous elections.
The next problem is the party whip system. With every member of a party voting the same in accordance with their party whip the problem is that the MP's no longer represent their local population. This is not the purpose of having a regional representative.
I would make the party whip system a criminal offense, and all parties using a whip subject to heavy custodial penalties. MP's should represent the people who voted for them and not their party political line.
-*-
The recent years of British politics have left me very disillusioned. Every time I vote for a left of centre party (and most of the British populace are left of centre) they go and swing to the right the moment they get in to power. It happened with Labour, and it happened with the Lib Dems.
Currently I am considering a vote for the Green party, their manifesto is the only one I can bring myself to vote for ethically - although I know some of it is impractical and would not be financially viable, the spirit of it is good.
All the 3 major parties in Britain are right of centre, they are part of this new breed of "social Conservatism" where on the face of it they promote this "social" frontage - pretending to be ethical and interested in the people, and yet behind the scenes they abolish things like the NHS equalities commission for being "too much red tape" and replace it with an organisation that ensures the interests of equality and diversity do not hinder with the "fairness" of the white wealthy man to make money out of the system.
I voted for AV in the referendum but only because PR was not an option. We should have been offered PR. A coalition is not a weak government, a coalition is a government that has to consider the views of others before getting it's own way on whatever it wants, and that is a good thing.
Which is a shame because in terms of page content that screenshot it isn't far off being great - but a few errors have resulted in a metaphoric car crash.
Just a little less distraction and moving the call to action in to the hot zone and changing the colour to make it stand out would go a long way.
The arrow pointing to the call to action is pointless. If it was my page I would test it against a version with a lower contrast, less ugly, menu. Sort out the background of the main banner as it is adding confusion to the page at the moment, then i'd move the call to action to the left and make it green and change the colour of the green "Gift Cards" button in the top right so that it did not take away from the call to action. Infact, the whole button style wants fixing really - they could all do with being reduced in contrast to help the call to action become more prominent, and just so that it isn't so damned ugly as a page.
I'd loose the top bar with the blog link and social icons completely, that's just distraction and isn't helping them.
The headline is not bad in that it is benefit led, but I would add a time incentive to that otherwise the cynical end of the demographic will see right through it and regard the offer as meaningless, plus time incentives add a sense of urgency especially as they get near 0.
Just a little less distraction and moving the call to action in to the hot zone and changing the colour to make it stand out would go a long way.
The arrow pointing to the call to action is pointless. If it was my page I would test it against a version with a lower contrast, less ugly, menu. Sort out the background of the main banner as it is adding confusion to the page at the moment, then i'd move the call to action to the left and make it green and change the colour of the green "Gift Cards" button in the top right so that it did not take away from the call to action. Infact, the whole button style wants fixing really - they could all do with being reduced in contrast to help the call to action become more prominent, and just so that it isn't so damned ugly as a page.
I'd loose the top bar with the blog link and social icons completely, that's just distraction and isn't helping them.
The headline is not bad in that it is benefit led, but I would add a time incentive to that otherwise the cynical end of the demographic will see right through it and regard the offer as meaningless, plus time incentives add a sense of urgency especially as they get near 0.
Sitelinks show up when your search is significantly more relevant than the next search result that isn't on your domain, Google generates them automatically on organic results (although they're hand crafted on PPC).
Google seems to pick pages with lots of internal site links, so stuff on the main navigation often gets there, but I've never tested or investigated the specifics.
http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fontface/generator
As a general rule sans serif works better on the web. Very few web sites benefit from serif - who's domain is print.
EDIT: I should also point out that on a commerce site the importance of clarity cannot be overstated. Futuristic fonts with cut outs in the letter design are not good. If you are trying to take peoples money - and lfs.net is a storefront - then you have to make it easy and remove all objections. People don't like spending money, and look for reasons not to.
Last edited by Becky Rose, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG