A nice thought, but I think that, in reality, those counties' leaders' overriding loyalty will be to staying in the EU. Look at David Cameron's stance throughout the run-up to the Brexit--he'd never have undermined the EU project to secure an advantage for Britain post-exit.
The other one I'm reminded of is Tic-tac, the bookmakers' sign language that John McCririck helped to bring to popular attention on Channel 4 Racing in the UK.
Exactly -- the latest major release is Darwin 15 (corresponding to OS X El Capitan / 10.11). I'd love to see this (or a similar) project succeed and remain relevant, but it just seems to be falling further and further behind the official releases.
(To be clear, I know there are good reasons for this, and I'm not trying to imply that a lot of work hasn't gone into what has been released ... but I can't help but wonder if there's no longer any hope of it catching up with (semi-closed) Darwin.)
Not quite. Comprehensive (non-selective) schools are the norm and have been for many years. Grammar schools only remain in very few areas, where the local authority has chosen to keep them. For the majority of the country, there isn't a local grammar school.
'Remembering' as in 'bearing in mind' rather than 'looking back nostalgically' (i.e. as in 'remember to look both ways before you cross the road'). My first instinct on seeing the title was the same as yours.
Congratulations. From an idea to an App Store app in 2 weeks is very impressive, but it's 10x more impressive given that you were learning along the way.
Simple question, though: what's the story behind the Metro article? Your story is interesting enough that it makes for good reading anyway, but I was wondering (and absolutely no offense intended -- there's nothing wrong with it imo) if you had a contact/friend/similar who helped you get the article? Again, congratulations, I hope your app continues to sell well.
The analogy went some way to showing how the argument based on there being "no direct competition" is a fallacy.
I find it very hard to believe that MS hasn't had a good look at Apple's OS X pricing strategy before making this move. It mightn't be that they feel pressured into lowering the price so much as they've just seen what Apple has done and think it's a good idea to get as many people to upgrade as possible.
The whole app feels like an imitation of a Mac app. Most obviously on 10.7, the window chrome is wrong. Other small things like incorrect and wrongly sized fonts inside controls, or the whole menu bar disappearing when you use an extension in its own window. When you add everything together, it just feels wrong, like wearing clothes that don't fit.
The way they've been updating the UI so far has seen some improvements, for sure, but it's as if they've been patching it bit by bit. I just wondered whether this signalled a change of approach.
I wonder whether this latest proposed redesign will finally have Firefox behaving like, y'know, a native OS X app, or whether it'll be just as shallow as all previous efforts.
Pretty easy, and superficially appealing, but I find that there must surely be exceptions to a rule such as this. Nuclear weapons (and similarly, some chemical weapons) are the obvious special case.
Edit: reminded reading a comment below that child pr0n is another one that the general moral consensus has problems with (I refer to the 'consensus' not because I think it is always correct but simply as it provides cases worth thinking about), and also handling stolen goods (although this can be justified through property rights).
If you want to be pernickety, 'alternative vote' is also a misnomer: the word 'alternative' comes from the Latin 'alter', which means 'the other of two [options]'. There are more than two voting systems, so AV is incorrect as a name, at least to traditionalists.
But this really doesn't have any bearing on which, if any, someone in Britain ought to vote for. That the name doesn't really fit doesn't say much at all about the merits of the system itself.
The "constitutional" aspect (if there is one) isn't the issue, though. The issue is whether I, you, or anyone else, wants a web host that takes down web sites it disapproves of. A web host can take down websites for misusing apostrophes, if it is entitled to by contract (if there's a broadly drafted term in the contract, this might even be possible in the real world, not just hypothetically). But would you want to do business with them?