Search results

Fair enough (though Tru at least said his comment was directed at me). I have no time for claiming anyone has a right to this forum, but I'm equally disappointed at the seemingly blanket insults that come from those in support. It would perhaps be interesting to discuss the issues around...

*shrugs* And you don't have to listen to those talking about it. I guess Sainsbury's are idiots too then?

And this too - can we refrain from the insults and the assumptions please?

Yes, ultimately someone is free to do what they like with their forum; I am not disputing that. But this is what I mean that anyone who disagrees is seen as disrespectful. I don't think anyone has said we should pretend 9/11 didn't happen.

Presumably you don't see them as idiotic, if you are here :/ I'm not suggesting the Overclockers website should have been shut, I'm just questioning the idea that closing websites is anything to do with respect. If I shouldn't be on a forum as a mark of respect, then perhaps I shouldn't be...

Why wasn't www.overclockers.co.uk closed also as a mark of respect? That's the point though - if we had a day closed for all of these, there wouldn't be many days it was open for... I feel the problem when discussing issues on threads like this is that anyone who disagrees is seen as...

But that's what travelling forward in time means. "Seeing yourself in the future" actually involves time travel *backwards* - since information has to travel from the future, into the present.

I'm surprised at the number of people getting things mixed up and saying we can't go *forwards*, or that it means the future is predetermined. It means no such thing. It's going backwards in time that causes paradoxes, or implies that the future is predetermined - since that means someone can...

I'm presuming right now we don't have the technology to automatically facially recognise people (even if wearing a hat etc), and monitor everybody's movements, and link that information up to a database containing information on who we are. Right now, CCTV is used to monitor *public* space, and...

Indeed - I'd love to see someone do a New Labour Club Card: "You need to have one to enter our shop, and rather than give you money off, we make you pay £90 for it!" Yeah, that'd be popular.

This doesn't make sense, in many ways: * I have to carry more cards on me, because you currently like to carry more cards than necessarily, even though you have no reason to? * If you were really bothered by the number of cards you carried, why not make your driving licence the "single...

Under what circumstances do you need both a passport and a driving licence on you? Most of the time, I don't need any ID. If I need to have an ID card on me for more occasions, then that's "one more card" I'll be carrying around with me, and hence I am better off without the scheme.

I don't have a Tesco club card, so no, they don't know that much about me.

I see a lot of comments of the form "ID cards will be fine, as long as such-and-such isn't true", where "such-and-such" is something that nonetheless is true. So I don't see why these people seem to be in favour of the scheme, when it fails their requirements. Yes, it may be that different...

When you say this, it sounds like you aren't in favour of it after all, if you object to the cost. You may not care - but there's a difference between being apathetic, and being a supporter of ID cards.