|
So what took them so long? Or they debated if destroying one of the greatest brains ever lived was a good thing?
Nuclear launch detected
|
|
|
|
|
I pardon the Queen for taking so long to'pardon' Alan Turing - however he did not need pardoning as he did nothing wrong.
Surely it would be better to admit the cruelty committed by her government and for her to posthumously ask for forgiveness.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
You don't understand how this works do you? The government did not prosecute Alan Turing, the courts did. She can't overturn court verdicts, they have to be overturned via parliament. And while we know he did nothing wrong under the laws that we have in place now, the unpleasant fact is that he did commit a crime under the laws that existed at the time.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: You don't understand how this works do you?
The laws are agreed by both houses of parliament and the Queen gives her royal assent.
That to me states that both the government and Queen play a major role in the creating of laws under which people are prosecuted.
Unfortunately generally the only manner in which stupid laws are revoked is by them being broken en masse.
Saying that he committed a crime is a truism, which says nothing about the ass that the law was that he broke at the time.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Um. Not really. Liz became queen in Feb 1952 on the death of her father, and Turing was prosecuted in March of the same year, so she can't really be held personally culpable since the law had been in effect for many years before she ascended the throne.
Never underestimate the power of stupid things in large numbers
--- Serious Sam
|
|
|
|
|
But responsibility works like this: take a person that isn't necessarily to blame, blame them anyways.
So he can go ahead and hold the queen responsible for something she didn't do.
|
|
|
|
|
That only works with Lawyers and similar pond life! 
Never underestimate the power of stupid things in large numbers
--- Serious Sam
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Liz became queen in Feb 1952 on the death of her father, and Turing was prosecuted in March of the same year, so she can't really be held personally culpable since the law had been in effect for many years before she ascended the throne.
Nor should she receive accolades for it either since the issuance of that type of Pardon by her is almost certainly initiated by the UK government and is not initiated at her behest.
Indeed the movement to get the pardon has existed for years and the UK government took the action that they could 4 years ago. This action is the only way the UK government can actually produce this sort of Pardon.
|
|
|
|
|
Would Alan possibly pardon her?
He does not need pardon.
Veni, vidi, vici.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And I found a Christmas present from last year still wrapped up that I had forgotten to give to my kids...
Pity really, I think they would have really liked that kitten!!
|
|
|
|
|
Its not too late to give it to them for Christmas this year though.
|
|
|
|
|
We have some guests and they wanted to see the panto.
Sadly we couldn't get eight seats together so I volunteered to stay outside and watch the coats.
Said clothing is a lot more entertaining than some bunch of z listers and failed comics.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
Oh no you didn't!
It's behind you!
|
|
|
|
|
Under the leaves!
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
A good solution. From the title, I'd presumed you closed your eyes and meditated on the presentation.
Yours, saving you the cost of a ticket, would seem to be a better solution.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Just watch the kids having fun. Best entertainment there is.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Read the subject, thought Vilmos, thought Gin!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I doubt that JSOP has one of those. He strikes me as a "Made in America" guy. I, on the other hand, do have one, and it's a pleasure to shoot. Next time you see Lauren on here, check her profile pic. 
Will Rogers never met me.
modified 23-Dec-13 18:16pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Wright wrote: Next time you Lauren on here, check her profile pic.
Ah yes!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
When you're finished, grieve for the 2,000,000 men, women, and children that his "tools" killed.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: When you're finished, grieve for the 2,000,000 men, women, and children that his "tools" killed.
Yes, I know I was stepping onto a landmine.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: landmine
No that would be Nils Waltersen.
|
|
|
|
|
tool
/tuːl/
noun
1. a device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function.
Not sure what your decision to put single quotes around the word was intended to say. The only use of single-quote marks that I'm familiar with in that situation is to imply that the chosen word is inappropriate.
That the implement has been used by many to kill those 2,000,000 is indeed an unfortunate thing - it's also indicative of the brilliant simplicity and robustness that are incorporated into its design - it wouldn't have been the weapon of choice if not for it's brilliant design - it's a hell of a lot more clever than anything I came up with as a 28 year old, how about you?
Presumably you're able to separate appreciation of a clever design and lamentation of the way the design may be/has been abused?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
