Interesting Links for 08-10-2012

[andrewducker]

• The Kissing Sailor, or “The Selective Blindness of Rape Culture”
  (tags: society history RapeCulture sex )
• Chatbots are still not able to pass the Turing Test, even though porn spammers are clearly working on it.
  (tags: ai turing chat im porn spam )
• How To Steal The Space Shuttle: A Step-By-Step Guide
  (tags: funny theft shuttle space )
• The Nazis

Comments

[strawberryfrog]

The article still leaves open the question of *why* Orkney was the centre of ancient Britain - i.e. why build there, given that it's "bleak"?

Perhaps "remote" means "defendable" and that was important? I don't think that the climate was warmer 6000 years ago.

[danieldwilliam]

It being bleak might be part of the reason.

With fewer trees it is easier to clear farming land.

Just my guess.

[cartesiandaemon]

Or, after you clear farming land, there's fewer trees?? I don't know.

[ggreig]

It doesn't adequately answer your question, as there has to be more to it than this, but with our modern road and rail systems we tend to forget travel by water used to be considered easier than overland; in which case islands become more interesting.

[danieldwilliam]

There is a question here about the role of the

I’ve been to the Ness of Brodgar. I went last summer for an archaeology open day and had a tour of the digs.

What they are finding is pretty awesome. The technology is surprising. The quality of the workmanship superb. The economic effort required huge. It’s a very impressive site.

[kashandara]

The fact that technically my parents, who I've barely spoken to in the last 10 years, will have the right to refuse to allow my organs to be donated really bothers me.

I carry a card stating my wishes, my driver's license carries the same information, I have added myself to the national register stating my desire that my body be used to help others once I no longer need it. And I did all of those things while in a calm and considered state of mind, not in the middle of a deeply emotional and horrible situation. This really ought to be enough surely?

[andrewducker]

Bothers me too. I think it's the duty of the executor of your will to deal with the disposal of your body - but it would be great if doctors could just go with your wishes.

[danieldwilliam]

If one has any financial legacy I think one could use that to enforce your decision.

A clause along the lines of “If my organs are not offered for donation by the beneficiaries of my estate my entire estate to be donated to the purposes of .

This would then need to be communicated to one’s heirs and successors. The prospect of missing out on an inheritance might concentrate the minds of one’s grieving family.

[kashandara]

Interestingly... Having decided I should go look see if there is anything else I can do, NHS Scotland's FAQ gives the impression that they will overrule relatives if you have been clear in your own wishes. Can't seem to find much by way of statistics or evidence of whether that actually happens or not, but it's something at least

[helflaed]

The bear photo- could it be that Private Wojtek of the Free Polish Army was doing a little extra intelligence work? http://www.wojtekthebear.com/ - after all he did manage to catch one spy himself...

[gwendally]

It *really* bugs me when people put a smooch in public in the same category as being raped in an alley on the way home from a concert

[naath]

Assault is about the lack of consent. If I do not consent to you touching me then your touching me is assault. I really do not care what pathetic excuses you want to assert - if you touch me without my consent you are assaulting me.

Certainly "being elated" is not a good reason to assault someone. There are a tiny number of situations in which there exists a genuine good reason to touch someone with their consent, this is most certainly not one of them.

Yes, some assaults are more serious than others; that does not mean that less serious assaults are not assaults.

[gwendally]

I really have to question your definition here. I know you *believe* that assault is "being touched without your consent". But I think you are incorrect. You live in a world with 7 billion people and many of them are going to brush up against you in life in a variety of ways. To term those all "assault" is to completely render the word meaningless

[andrewducker]

Actually, it doesn't have to cause harm to be assault in the UK. It has to be an expression of unlawful force. It's lawful if it's covered by:
1) Reasonable punishment of a child S.58 Children Act 2004
2) Where the victim consents
3) Where the defendant acts in self- defence or prevention of a crime

Outside of those limits, constraining someone else physically is legally assault. From a case in 1981:
"any intentional [or reckless] touching of another person without the consent of that person and without lawful excuse. It need not necessarily be hostile, rude, or aggressive.”

http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Battery.php