Login with username and password (forgot your password?)

[can]

Understood. I would like to thank you for being a gracious host. I feel that I must bid you goodbye. Please know that all my best wishes are with you.

We cannot control events that affect us, but we can control our response to them.
In New Zealand, that kind of response would probably be termed "spitting the dummy".   
Chillax @Renegade.

[would]

I would really like this forum to avoid anything related to discussing investing or making money on markets -- it's just not the place for it.
It's one thing for us to discuss the concept of something like bitcoins -- but when we start showing charts and talking about making money and when to buy and sell, etc.. that has no place here.

Yes, and there seem to be plenty of alternative forums to engage in or discuss these things.
However, because of its digital nature, it would seem to be relevant to discuss Bitcoins in the DC Forum, but not necessarily in the manner it predominately seems to be being discussed at present.

It is worth discussing because: To a student of economic theory and practice, Bitcoin is something that seems to break theory by peacefully offering a new, artificial, common, potentially safe and unregulated/uncontrolled (by any government) alternative to any and all national currency, and thereby potentially enabling the consumer to avoid the use of the banking system.
The potential implications are tremendous, apparently including, for example, transformation of the global money supply and associated inter-bank Forex and payments/settlements systems, greater freedom from taxation (forced State theft) and from compulsory/proprietary usury by the banks. Bitcoin would seem to have the potential to defeat the system of fractional reserve banking, which is a major means by which governments effect their State control over the voters.

For speculators to focus on the profits to be made from gambling in arbitrage trading, as a new market develops, would be a natural thing for any emerging market, and will generally assist in its development and stability - Bitcoin would presumably be no exception to that. However, there is some irony in that, where the trade profits are being measured in a State's currency, the new thing is being measured in terms of the old which it could eventually render obsolete. Bitcoins could potentially become the new Gold Standard and the major/only global currency, where the thing being traded (Bitcoin money) is the standard - a modern digital form of gold coins.

There are other forums on the Internet specifically set up for discussing and learning about mining and dealing/trading in the supply of Bitcoins - a good start might be, for example, the Bitcoin Forum - http://bitcointalk.org

[Wikipedia editor allegedly forced by French intelligence to delete “classified” entry]

Meanwhile, ArsTechnica reports that the French police/SS (Secret Services) have been giving an amusing demonstration of Internet censorship and obscurity on the Internet, coupled with the Streisand effect:
Wikipedia editor allegedly forced by French intelligence to delete “classified” entry

...The entry had existed on French-language Wikipedia for many years, but recently came to the attention of officials in France's Homeland Intelligence agency, known as the DCRI (Direction Centrale du Renseignement Intérieur)...    

According to Wikiscan, which publishes statistics about Wikipedia.fr, the “Station hertzienne militaire de Pierre-sur-Haute” entry is currently the most-viewed page in french-language Wikipedia, broadly beating “The September 11th Attacks” and “Jérôme Cahuzac”, France's chief tax collector who is currently embroiled in a tax-dodging scandal.    

Beautiful. You couldn't make it up.

There is no mention yet on whether the Wikipedia entry on the top secret Maginot Line is to be similarly expunged.    

EDIT 2013-04-07 2005hrs:
Wikipedia's Maginot Line article and the Station hertzienne militaire de Pierre-sur-Haute article are both still there as at this date/time.
I've made an archive copy of both if anyone wants, and if either gets deleted in the next few hours (just PM me).    

[attach]

Looks like Inspector Clouseau or his descendants may be alive and well in the French police/SS.

[adafruit]

Kill-A-Watt (see attachment in previous post)
Plug this gadget into a wall outlet and then plug your appliance or other gadget into it...

Thanks for posting this.
Spotted this rather interesting mod at adafruit:RaspiWatt: discover power consumption using a Kill-A-Watt & Pi

Now, where's my soldering iron?...

[IsoHunt Wants Jury to Rule on Free Speech Issues in MPAA Case]

Another example of **AA prescriptive/censorship activity on the Internet being challenged:

IsoHunt Wants Jury to Rule on Free Speech Issues in MPAA Case
April 6, 2013

Last month BitTorrent site isoHunt lost its appeal against the MPAA, meaning that the site has to continue filtering movie and TV related terms from its search engine. However, isoHunt founder Gary Fung is not giving up just yet and has asked for a jury to decide on the case. In a petition filed this week isoHunt argues that, among other things, the Ninth Circuit decision chills innovation and threatens free speech online.

mpaa isohuntFor more than seven years isoHunt and the MPAA have been battling in court, and it’s not over yet.

In 2010 the District Court ordered the owner of isoHunt to start censoring the site’s search engine based on a list of thousands of keywords provided by the MPAA, or cease its operations entirely in the US.

IsoHunt hoped to overturn this ruling in an appeal, but last month the Ninth Circuit upheld the decision of the lower court, ruling that the website does not qualify for safe harbor protection under the DMCA.

For now this means that the keyword filter stays in place, but for isoHunt founder Gary Fung this is not the end of the matter. This week isoHunt’s legal team petitioned the court for a re-hearing before a jury.

Among other things, isoHunt argues that the current verdict chills innovation and threatens free speech on the Internet.

“Fung contends that many of the items of evidence cited by the District Court should be protected as Free Speech under the First Amendment to the Constitution and would be inadmissible at trial. As a result of decisions herein, impermissible burdens are being imposed on Fung’s speech and on the speech of other Internet users,” the petition reads.

The MPAA used quotes from isoHunt’s founder dating back to 2003, to argue that he was aware of and liable for copyright infringing use of the site. As evidence the MPAA cited the following statements made by Fung in a forum thread discussing the RIAA.

“Agreed. they accuse us for thieves, and they r right. Only we r ‘stealing’ from the leechers (them!) and not the originators (artists),” Fung wrote.

IsoHunt’s founder later updated the IRC announce bot to say: “Files… are now being indexed for isoHunt.com…We completely OPPOSE RIAA & Co., so do not be alarmed by our indexing activities.”

In its petition for a re-hearing isoHunt argues that when these isolated statements are used to determine liability, without any connection to direct infringements, this could “severely chill free speech” and threaten innovation.

“The effect of decisions herein is to make sarcasm directed at copyright enforcement or statements in support of file-sharing a reason for later imposition of liability. Cautious individuals will practice self-censorship. Outspoken individuals will avoid certain areas of technological development,” isoHunt’s legal team writes.

The free speech concerns are not the only issue raised by isoHunt. The petition also contends that there is no evidence that isohunt’s founder promoted or facilitated direct copyright infringements.

In addition, the petition protests the ruling that Fung should not be entitled to safe harbor protection under the DMCA because he knew that isoHunt users were sharing copyrighted material. According to isoHunt’s legal team this goes directly against verdicts in other cases, such as the dispute between YouTube and Viacom.

With a re-hearing before a jury isoHunt is confident it can win the case as that will provide an opportunity to counter specific allegations of copyright infringement. If this request is granted the case is expected to continue for a few more years, perhaps making it to its 10th anniversary in 2016.

["Do no evil."]

Why wait for the enactment of Bills from Congress, when you can trust the players with vested interests to "self-regulate"?
YouTube’s Deal With Universal Blocks DMCA Counter Notices

Hmm. Methinks this might rather be bypassing the interests and objections of the Internet citizens and users.

"Do no evil."
Yeah, right.

[The Daily Show: Egypt, Mohamed Morsi, and Bassem Youssef]

...Here's the whole thing. The part you quoted is around the 4:46 mark, but the whole thing is great when taken in context, and obvious why it was tweeted by the embassy and supported by the US State Department. 
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyDOAQNsTrI" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyDOAQNsTrI</a>

Thanks!     
I just got around to downloading that (The Daily Show: Egypt, Mohamed Morsi, and Bassem Youssef) and then watching it. (Too laggy on stream feed viewing.)

My conclusion: ROFL.     Thoroughly enjoyed it. That Jon Stewart is one heck of an amusing comedian - no wonder he has his own show. He's very good. Mercilessly "Takes the piss/Mickey" and "Pokes the borax", but I guess he couldn't do it if people he ridicules (e.g., Fuhrer President Morsi) didn't set themselves up for it in the first place.

Oh dear, now I'm going to want to watch more of his shows.

I liked them too. That collection is just one of roughly 2½ thousand jokes in my database.
(They only get to stay in the database if I like them.)

[Court transquips.]

Court transquips. (updated April 2006)

Consolidated from:
(a) various emails.
(b) a book apparently called "Disorder in the Court".
(c) apparently, Mary Louise Gilman, editor of the National Shorthand Reporter, who collected many of the more hilarious courtroom bloopers in two books - "Humor in the Court" (1977) and "More Humor in the Court".

- these are things that people reputedly said in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters - who probably had to suffer the torment of trying to stay calm while these exchanges were taking place.

=================================
Q: How long have you been a French Canadian?
=================================
Q: How far apart were the vehicles at the time of collision?
=================================
Q: Have you lived in this town all your life?
A: Not yet.
=================================

Q: How old is your son, the one living with you?
A: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can't remember which.

Q: How long has he lived with you?
A: Forty-five years.
=================================
Q: What was the first thing your husband said to you when he woke up that morning?
A: He said, "Where am I, Cathy?"

Q: And why did that upset you?
A: My name is Susan.
=================================
Q: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved in voodoo or the occult?
A: We both do.
Q: Voodoo?
A: We do.
Q: You do?
A: Yes, voodoo.
=================================

Q: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
A: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
=================================
Q: She had three children, right?
A: Yes.
Q: How many were boys?
A: None.
Q: Were there any girls?
=================================

Q: Can you describe the individual?
A: He was about medium height and had a beard.

Q: Was this a male or a female?
=================================
Q.  Are you married?
A.  No, I'm divorced.
Q.  And what did your husband do before you divorced him?
A.  A lot of things I didn't know about.
=================================
Q.  And who is this person you are speaking of?
A.  My ex-widow said it.
=================================
Q.  How did you happen to go to Dr.  Cherney?
A.  Well, a gal down the road had had several of her children by Dr. Cherney, and said he was really good.
=================================
Q.  Do you know how far pregnant you are right now?
A.  I will be three months November 8th.
Q.  Apparently then, the date of conception was August 8th?
A.  Yes.
Q.  What were you and your husband doing at that time?
=================================
Q.  Mrs.  Smith, do you believe that you are emotionally unstable?
A.  I should be.
Q.  How many times have you committed suicide?
A.  Four times.
=================================
Q.  Doctor, how many autopsies have you performed on dead people?
A.  All my autopsies have been performed on dead people.
=================================
Q.  Were you acquainted with the deceased?
A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  Before or after he died?
=================================
Q.  Officer, what led you to believe the defendant was under the influence?
A.  Because he was argumentary and he couldn't pronunciate his words.
=================================
Q.  What happened then?
A.  He told me, he says, "I have to kill you because you can identify me."
Q.  Did he kill you?
A.  No.
=================================
Q.  Mrs.  Jones, is your appearance this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
A.  No.  This is how I dress when I go to work.
=================================
THE COURT: Now, as we begin, I must ask you to banish all present information and prejudice from your minds, if you have any.
=================================
Q.  Did he pick the dog up by the ears?
A.  No.
Q.  What was he doing with the dog's ears?
A.  Picking them up in the air.
Q.  Where was the dog at this time?
A.  Attached to the ears.
=================================
Q.  When he went, had you gone and had she, if she wanted to and were able, for the time being excluding all the restraints on her not to go, gone also, would he have brought you, meaning you and she, with him to the station?
MR.  BROOKS: Objection. That question should be taken out and shot.
=================================
Q.  And lastly, Gary, all your responses must be oral.  O.K.?  What school do you go to?
A.  Oral.
Q.  How old are you?
A.  Oral.
=================================
Q.  What is your relationship with the plaintiff?
A.  She is my daughter.
Q.  Was she your daughter on February 13, 1979?
=================================
Q.  Now, you have investigated other murders, have you not, where there was a victim?
=================================
Q.  ...and what did he do then?
A.  He came home, and next morning he was dead.
Q.  So when he woke up the next morning he was dead?
=================================
Q.  Did you tell your lawyer that your husband had offered you indignities?
A.  He didn't offer me nothing; he just said I could have the furniture.
=================================
Q.  So, after the anaesthesia, when you came out of it, what did you observe with respect to your scalp?
A.  I didn't see my scalp the whole time I was in the hospital.
Q.  It was covered?
A.  Yes, bandaged.
Q.  Then, later on..  what did you see?
A.  I had a skin graft.  My whole buttocks and leg were removed and put on top of my head.
=================================
Q.  Could you see him from where you were standing?
A.  I could see his head.
Q.  And where was his head?
A.  Just above his shoulders.
=================================
Q.  What can you tell us about he truthfulness and veracity of this defendant?
A.  Oh, she will tell the truth.  She said she'd kill that sonofabitch - and she did!
=================================
Q.  Do you drink when you're on duty?
A.  I don't drink when I'm on duty, unless I come on duty drunk.
=================================
Q.  ...any suggestions as to what prevented this from being a murder trial instead of an attempted murder trial?
A.  The victim lived.
=================================
Q.  Are you sexually active?
A.  No, I just lie there.
=================================
Q.  Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
A.  Yes, I have been since early childhood.
=================================
Q.  The truth of the matter is that you were not an unbiased, objective witness, isn't it.  You too were shot in the fracas?
A.  No, sir.  I was shot midway between the fracas and the naval.
=================================
Q.  What is the meaning of sperm being present?
A.  It indicates intercourse.
Q.  Male sperm?
A.  That is the only kind I know.
=================================
Q.  (Showing man picture.) That's you?
A.  Yes, sir.
Q.  And you were present when the picture was taken, right?
=================================
Q.  Was that the same nose you broke as a child?
=================================
Q.  What is your name?
A.  Ernestine McDowell.
Q.  And what is your marital status?
A.  Fair.
=================================
Q.  Doctor, did you say he was shot in the woods?
A.  No, I said he was shot in the lumbar region.
=================================
Q.  Now, Mrs.  Johnson, how was your first marriage terminated?
A.  By death.
Q.  And by whose death was it terminated?
=================================
Q.  Did you ever stay all night with this man in New York?
A.  I refuse to answer that question.
Q.  Did you ever stay all night with this man in Chicago?
A.  I refuse to answer that question.
Q.  Did you ever stay all night with this man in Miami?
A.  No.
=================================
Q.  What is your brother-in-law's name?
A.  Borofkin.
Q.  What's his first name?
A.  I can't remember.
Q.  He's been your brother-in-law for years, and you can't remember his first name?
A.  No.  I tell you I'm too excited.  (Rising from the witness chair and pointing to Mr. Borofkin.) Nathan, for God's sake, tell them your first name!
=================================

Q: What is your date of birth?
A: July fifteenth.
Q: What year?
A: Every year.
=================================

Q: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
A: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
=================================

Q: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
A: Yes.

Q: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
A: I forget.
Q: You forget.  Can you give us an example of something that you've forgotten?
=================================

Q: How old is your son, the one living with you?
A: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can't remember which.

Q: How long has he lived with you?
A: Forty-five years.
=================================
Q: What was the first thing your husband said to you when he woke up that morning?
A: He said, "Where am I, Cathy?"

Q: And why did that upset you?
A: My name is Susan.
=================================
Q: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved in voodoo or the occult?
A: We both do.
Q: Voodoo?
A: We do.
Q: You do?
A: Yes, voodoo.
=================================

Q: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
=================================
Q: The youngest son, the twenty-year old, how old is he?
=================================

Q: Were you present when your picture was taken?
=================================

Q: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
A: Yes.

Q: And what were you doing at that time?
=================================
Q: She had three children, right?
A: Yes.
Q: How many were boys?
A: None.
Q: Were there any girls?
=================================

Q: How was your first marriage terminated?
A: By death.

Q: And by whose death was it terminated?
=================================

Q: Can you describe the individual?
A: He was about medium height and had a beard.
Q: Was this a male, or a female?
=================================

Q: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
A: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
=================================
Q: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
A: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
Q: And Mr. Dennington was dead at the time?
A: No, he was sitting on the table wondering why I was doing an autopsy.
=================================

Q: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
A: No.

Q: Did you check for blood pressure?
A: No.

Q: Did you check for breathing?
A: No.

Q: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
A: No.

Q: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
A: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
Q: But could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
A: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law somewhere.
=================================

[demandprogress.org]

demandprogress.org asks for action to block CFAA, in a circular email:

We need to beat back a bad proposal to expand the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) -- in a hurry.  So we're asking Demand Progress members and the broader Internet Defense League to snap into action next week, especially Monday and Tuesday (April 8th and 9th.)

1) You can read more and grab code for our embeddable contact-Congress widgets by clicking here: www.FixTheCFAA.com
 
We'd ask you to post them to your site to help let your visitors know about this threat, and to spur them to get involved.  You'll be joining Fight for the Future, Demand Progress, EFF, Boing Boing, Reddit, and other great groups and sites as we stand together against this awful proposal.
 
2) You can use these links to ask your friends to take part:

[fb]    If you're already on Facebook, click here to share with your friends.
[fb]    If you're already on Twitter, click here to tweet about the campaign: Tweet
 
As many of you probably know, our friend (and friend to many of you) Aaron Swartz committed suicide earlier this year, while he was being prosecuted for downloading too many academic articles from the JSTOR cataloguing site.  Prosecutors were hanging four decades in prison over his head!

Aaron was charged under the CFAA, a law that passed in the mid-80s, before more than a handful of Americans even had personal computers -- let alone Internet access.

Yet law enforcement interprets this statute so broadly that it claims it criminalizes all sorts of mundane Internet use: potentially even breaking a website's fine print terms of service agreement.  Don't set up a Myspace page for your cat.  Don't fudge your height on a dating site.  Don't share your Facebook password with anybody, ever.  You could be exposed to prosecution for a federal crime.

We've been pushing to change this, and have made some progress: Reps and Senators are pulling together a proposal called "Aaron's Law".

But... then last week members of the House Judiciary Committee floated an audacious proposal that would actually expand and harshen certain parts of the CFAA.  Think of it as the opposite of Aaron's Law.  And we're hearing that it could come up for a vote as soon as next week.

We need your helping mobilizing your visitors as we strive to beat back this awful proposal and to build momentum for Aaron's Law.
 
1) You can read more and grab code for our embeddable contact-Congress widgets by clicking here: www.FixTheCFAA.com
 
We'd ask you to post them to your site to help let your visitors know about this threat, and to spur them to get involved.  You'll be joining Fight for the Future, Demand Progress, EFF, Boing Boing, Reddit, and other great groups and sites as we stand together against this awful proposal.
 
2) You can use these links to ask your friends to take part:

[fb]    If you're already on Facebook, click here to share with your friends.
[fb]    If you're already on Twitter, click here to tweet about the campaign: Tweet
 
Reforming the CFAA is a real chance for the US Congress to make laws governing the Internet better and fairer.  And it's a chance for the coalition that came together around SOPA to actually pass positive reform.  If all of us take action next week, it won't just kill a bad bill, it will help us build real momentum to passing positive change in the wake of Aaron's death.
 
Thanks,
 
Demand Progress
Paid for by Demand Progress (DemandProgress.org) and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Contributions are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.

One last thing -- Demand Progress's small, dedicated, under-paid staff relies on the generosity of members like you to support our work. Will you click here to chip in $5 or $10? Or you can become a Demand Progress monthly sustainer by clicking here. Thank you!

[Guido Fawkes]

This is good news. I read about it in a post by Guido Fawkes:
(Copied below sans embedded hyperlinks/images.)

A Tip-Off For the Guardian Investigations Team
April 4th, 2013

Today’s Guardian splashes on millions of leaked emails revealing the “secrets of the super-rich” using offshore tax havens to hide vast sums of money from the Exchequer. One company was missing from the list: GMG Hazel Acquisition 1 Limited, registered and still active on the Cayman Islands. The last time Guido asked the company’s owners, Guardian Media Group, for an explanation he was told their spokesperson was, er, abroad. When Guido asked Liz Forgan of the Scott Trust what was going on, she tried to blame it on Apax, GMG’s investment partner. Even Alan Rusbridger promised to look in to it, making a note of the company name on his phone.

Always one to help their journalists get to the bottom of the mystery, Guido suggests the Guardian’s investigations team take a look at the following:

    If GMG Hazel Acquisition 1 Limited holds no assets, why have its owners continued to pay registration fees since 2007 so it can remain an active company?
    If it does hold assets what is the total present value of GMG and associated companies’ assets held via the Cayman Islands or other offshore tax havens?
    Does GMG Hazel Acquisition 1 Limited have “sham” nominee directors, if so, who are they?

If they could answer these questions, now that would be a great story…

There's nothing new about these tax-havens. What does seem to be new is the dump of account-holder details.
I read that something similar happened some years back, regarding the publication of "Anonymous" Swiss bank accounts of deceased German Jews and German Nazis officials that the Swiss banks didn't want to be published (for fear of having to make restitution of assets to their descendants or government(s).

"The rule of thumb is that, if a business process can not stand the hard light of scrutiny, then there is probably something unethical about it". - Sir Adrian Cadbury (Chairman of the then Quaker family-owned Cadbury's) in his prize-winning article on Business Ethics for Harvard Business Review circa 1984.

[Court asks for Dikshit's medical records]

A news headline I was surprised to see:
Court asks for Dikshit's medical records

[Semper in excremento, solo profundo variat.]

  Humor and what is humerous is different from country to country.  What the British think is funny (British Humor) may not be funny in China, and visa-versa.

Semper in excremento, solo profundo variat.

I don't really know who he is, but I found this comedian's joking remark (in the context of Egypt's political turmoil) pretty astute:

"Democracy isn't democracy if it only lasts up until someone makes fun of your hat." - comedian/satirist John Jon Stewart on the Today Show.

Interestingly, it was apparently Tweeted by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and supported by the US State Department in Washington.

[@wraith808:]

@wraith808: As a boy in North Wales, in school holidays I used to go round in the mornings to help out at the dairy farm next door (Evans the Milk's farm). I'd help out with the milking and the mucking-out (shit-shovelling) in the milking shed, and do various other odd-jobs (e.g., help out on the milk delivery round, move sheep to another paddock), and as payment I would take home to Mum two pints of fresh, pure and creamy milk (still warm from the cows that had been milked that morning), and freshly hand-churned butter - which sometimes I was the one to have been given the job of churning.
      
Years later (approx. 5 years ago), with my head stuffed full of business management, science, IT, computer programming, computer modelling and financial accounting, I was coincidentally assigned to a contract as a programme manager overseeing 80+ projects (some of which were multi-million dollar projects) relating to the set-up, operation and improvement of manufacturing and supply-chain processes in the operation of NZ's largest dairy producer in diverse parts of the world - e.g., including Australasia (New Zealand, Australia), Asia (including Japan), and South America (including Argentina, Brazil).
I learned a tremendous amount about the relevant foreign nations' laws, and the peculiar lengths that dairy manufacturer's have to go to, to ensure and maintain pure and consistent/stable quality in their output, in order to meet the stringent statutory quality standards of local and overseas markets.
      
With this background, and with what I have learned, I therefore considered that the image you posted was:

• (a) rather clever
• (b) quite acceptable (inoffensive) humour - especially in a NSFW forum
• (c) valid comment
• (d) presumably and arguably relatively accurate (about the US FDA I mean)
• (e) making a valid point in a factual and amusing way, without making any person or class of people the butt of the joke.

      
Above all, it was simply funny. But you seem to have felt compelled to "self-censor" by taking the image down. What a pity! It is our loss!
Your opinion of what is funny is as valid as the next person's - as you say "I thought it was pretty good for a laugh."
Well, so did others - e.g., including myself and @Tomos:

...But I did enjoy it; and (unfortunately) trust the FDA about as far as I could throw them collectively.

      
I feel sure that @app103 did not intend for you to remove your joke on his/her say-so. No, that would be censorship. Quite the contrary, it was, I would suggest, a rather subtle joke on @app103's part to start debating the veracity/validity of your joke and then (rather amusingly) contradict that by saying that it must not be debated in this forum thread     , pointing ironically and in self-deprecating fashion to a statement of personal opinion (Re: Staple of people from State and Europe !) as though it was the absolute last word on the facts in a debate (which it categorically was not, if you read the thread). Very droll.
(I suspect that @app103 is a bit of a wag with a dry sense of humour.)
      
Never mind. If you like badges, here's a fun new badge for you to wear - I use it a lot:
      
[attach]
      
- and here are some suggestions that you might like to consider, for using as a possibly more suited/fitting avatar/logo to replace the one that you currently use:
      
[attach]   [attach]

[attach]
      
The three wise monkeys have long been a favourite of mine.

By the way, though this is stated as being a NSFW (Not Safe For Work) silly joke forum, I didn't think that meant that it was "Not Safe For People Whose Opinions Conflict With Ours". I feel sure that no-one here really intends to ram their opinions about what is funny or "right" humour and what is not, down our throats.

If you like pictures from astronomy, you could do worse than get APOD (Astronomy Picture Of the Day) into your feedreader
This is the latest: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap130402.html

[The senusal wife.]

The senusal wife.

"Have you ever seen a twenty dollar bill all crumpled up?" asked the wife, smiling.

"No." said her husband.

She gave him a sexy little smile, slowly reached into her cleavage and pulled out a very crumpled twenty-dollar bill.

Still smiling, she said "Have you ever seen a fifty all crumpled up?"

"Uh, no." he said.

She gave him another sexy little smile, seductively reached into her panties and pulled out a very crumpled fifty-dollar bill.

"Now," she said, "have you ever seen 40,000 dollars all crumpled up?"

"No!" he said, now really intrigued.

"Well go look in the garage..."

[Awesome Wells]

Silly shoolboy humour in the vein of "sounds like" and following on from "France Is Bacon", here are some books worth reading:
Awesome Wells - an autobiography.
The Dangerous Precipices of Switzerland by Eileen Over.
The  US Cavalry - 40 Years in the Saddle, by Mjr. Bumsaw.
_____________________
- and a knock-knock joke:
"Knock-knock"
"Who's there?"
"Adolf."
"Adolf who?"
"Adolfball in my mouth that's why I can't fpeek properly."
____________________

...I have overcome the problem by downloading to my laptop, installing, then copying the complete program and installing onto my desktop.  Now works fine, in my opinion, not as good as Mendeley

That's really odd. I wonder why a straightforward install does not work on your PC? At a guess, I'd say it might be some necessary system file/version that is absent from from your XP OS.

Are you able to elaborate specifically as to why Qiqqa is "...not as good as Mendeley..."? That could be quite useful feedback for me to put into the OP of this review. I had tried Mendeley and some others quite some time ago, before settling on Qiqqa, so it might be that these softwares have changed and are in a kind of technological leapfrog.

["Qiqqa save the OCR result in the database, instead of in the corresponding PDF"]

I tried this several years ago. So my experience is based the old version.
There are somethings that I don't like
1. Qiqqa save the OCR result in the database, instead of in the corresponding PDF.
2. Qiqqa is designed to use the internal pdf viewer. But I prefer to use PDF XChange.

PDF XChange can perform OCR and save the result in the PDF.
This makes Qiqqa less attracting.

Thanks for that rather interesting info. I did not know that "Qiqqa save the OCR result in the database, instead of in the corresponding PDF", but I can see that, if true, then that would probably explain why "Qiqqa is designed to use the internal pdf viewer". I wonder if the current version still does that?

That could be quite an important distinction to make for someone who wanted to move about Qiqqa's version of the PDFs and the OCR together - after all, PDF does stand for "Portable Document Format"!   

I shall try and find out whether Qiqqa still does not embed the OCR output in the PDF file to which it relates. If it still does not, then I feel sure there would be a reason. Fortunately, it wouldn't really affect me, either way, because for my requirements the only document I want to be able to move about would be the original (source) document in my Library, not some semi-proprietary version/copy of the original that Qiqqa had created in its database.

If a Library PDF document of mine was an imaged document, and if I wanted to OCR it, then I would tend to do the OCR on/in that original Library document on an individual or batch basis, using (say) PDF XChange Viewer - which does a good job in that regard.

[defensedistributed.com]

I have no idea whether this was an April Fool's-type joke, and I was largely ignorant of the significance of the defensedistributed.com domain anyway, though I was vaguely aware of but not overly interested in the technology used in the printing manufacture of gun components.
I had to do some googling on the subject to reduce my ignorance.

Discovery: Whoops! This looks like a pretty important domain to those who would see themselves as upholding and protecting the full intent of the Second Amendment, even as the latter seems to be undergoing a State-sponsored whittling-away under their very noses.

However, I am skeptical about this supposed domain seizure. It could well be an AF joke by (say) defensedistributed.com supporters, intended to make it look as though defensedistributed.com was a victim and was having the book thrown at it by the Establishment in order to kill it stone dead.
In which case, some people (not me, you understand) might say that this could presumably be an attempt at suggesting that, if defensedistributed.com has not in actuality done anything illegal yet - as a corporate person - and if it could also be perceived as a potential or real threat to the Establishment, then all due process within the State's ambit could (and just might) be brought to bear to ensure that defensedistributed.com and those associated with it were turned into or re-engineered in the public's eye as criminals and pariahs in society. However, I couldn't possibly comment.

We shall no doubt be told whether it was a joke.

Either way, one wonders what Julian Assange would make of this, or, for that matter, what Aaron Swartz (apparently regarded by many as a martyr to the cause of Freedom) might have made of it.

[Results:]

Sorry, just got around to going to read DCF posts and saw your request ^.
This should be more helpful.
It just so happens that some of my screenshots of the Calculator are .bmp files (not sure how I did that - was by accident), and some are .png files.

To test things, I have just performed lots of deletions, and restored them from the Recycle Bin, and deleted them again, etc.
Results:
1. Deleting .bmp and/or .png (one or more at a time) from any of the menu File delete  choices does not seem to cause any problems, so far.

2. However, when deleting using the Delete key as before:

• The crashes ONLY ever occur via this method.
• The file(s) is(are) deleted (to Recycle Bin), and then SSC crashes.
• However: SSC ONLY crashes when a .PNG file is deleted.
• That is: SSC does not crash on a single/multiple .bmp file delete.
• If a .bmp and a .png file are deleted together at the same time, then a SSC crash occurs. So it seem to be that the presence of a .PNG file in the deletions is what ensures the crash will occur.

That looks like progress, to me.

OS = Win7-64 Home Premium.
I was using SSC to capture screenshots of the Windows Calculator, and I deleted those I did not want by clicking on the file icon in the LHS of the window, and then using the Delete key. Crash.
Restarted SSC, did another delete. Crash. Rinse and repeat.
After the third or fourth successive crash, I captured the error message (as in my post above).

I just did it again to check (2013-03-30 0646hrs). Started up SSC (after its last crash), took a screenshot of the calculator; deleted the screenshot file. Exact same result. Crashes a couple of seconds right after the Delete action.
So, yes, it looks like I can reproduce it consistently.
I can't explain it.
There's nothing else buggy in my system, and I am using all my other usual applications just fine.

Thanks for this latest release.
Some nifty new features that I am still exploring here...
Sorry to report that I seem to be able to make SSC crash repeatedly by deleting the file icons (for capture files that I want to delete) down the LHS of the main screen.
The first time it did it, there was a message with an access violation error.
After that it just kept crashing with the same message:

[Window Title]
Screenshot Captor

[Main Instruction]
Screenshot Captor has stopped working

[Content]
A problem caused the program to stop working correctly. Windows will close the program and notify you if a solution is available.

[Close program]

[@wales:]

@wales: I have drawn a blank looking for help on this install problem you have been having.
On the Qiqqa forum there is an unsolved problem posted:

XXXX February 17, 2012 14:42
Installation problem
When trying to install qiqqa on windows xp the message "sp2 required" the problem is, I have already upgraded from sp2 to sp3, but the installation does not recognise this.
Help would be appreciated.

I guess this would be you.(?) The indication might be that no-one else has reported the problem.