TreeNuts

Oyster as in the shellfish?

You can make wine, syrup or drink it neat. A word of warning when boiling it down to make syrup though: keep a very close eye on it because 60 seconds too late and it'll char. There are loads of YouTube vids that provide excellent instructions on tapping, not just Birch, but other species too

Would love to see your over and be pointed to some instructions for construction? I tapped a couple of Birch trees the other day. Repaired the holes as required. Drank half the neat liquid and boilded the rest down to make delicious syrup. Some say the neat sap is very sweet. I would say that it's sweet for water, but not sugary sweet, although certainly refreshing. Also munched on some wild garlic along the way, which is always a treat for I frikking love garlic (reincarnation wish.)

:lol:

What's wrong with it?

Having someone else oil the chain was hard to bare, although amusing to watch, I must admit.

Used open source for years, and have no complaints. The crux of this debate probably concerns ease of use. If you know how to properly tame an operating system, then you'll most likely avoid problems. I see why people go for Mac OS's because they're easier to use and less prone to attack. But the more computer savvy people do save money by using open source software and custom built PC's. PC based software is generally more flexible and cheaper that Mac software, but this OS flexibility comes with it's own problems i.e. potentially more buggy. It's a trade off at the end of the day.

Why is the iPlayer intro music so frikking loud? Almost blew my earphones off.

Thanks again Unnos. That one passed me by somehow. Any luck with grants your end?

That's where we'll have to agree to disagree, as I would reason that anything more severe than a fine is disproportionate to the offence at hand. It's swings and roundabouts really. The government continually raises the already expensive price of fuel across the board, so when I hear of someone using red, I immediately sympathise. If fraud is committed against an already corrupt organisation, like certain areas of government and HMCE, then who am I to say that they're wrong for breaking the rules for their own benefit? After all, it doesn't hurt me or you, it just treads on the toes of government accountants. Now if the price of fuel was fair, and someone was caught using red, I'd still maintain that vehicle impounding was disproportionate to the offence as a fine should be sufficient on the whole. I simply cannot see how the government has the power to confiscate another persons property for such a trivial offence that hasn't really, in the grand scheme of things, caused anyone harm or loss? Anyway, that's my 2p's worth, which is about how much fuel is set to soon rise again.

Innocent until proven guilty is the bedrock, or it should be, of law in this country. Fining someone for using red at that point in time, say £500, should be an adequate discouragement in this society. But to assume they've been breaking the law all this time without the required proof is folly and mocks the founding maxims of law. Yes, there is perhaps cause for further investigation based on reasonable, articulable suspicion, but to base the fine on their age is ridiculous really. That's like catching someone in possession of a small amount of pot, then multiplying the fine by their adult age.

If you agree with the law, then yes. But in terms of law, the punishment must fit the offence, and in this case impounding someones vehicle doesn't add up. A financial penalty is fair enough.

Roughtly 72p per litre

Why stop there. How about beheading the driver too? Really, kidnapping someone's vehicle, someone that hasn't done anything that bad in the grand scheme of things is bang out of order. Fine them, yes. But take their wheels. Never mess with another man's wheels If I used red I'd accept the consequence, providing the consequence fitted the crime.

Putting the vehicles roadworthyness aside for a moment, I think it's extreme for them to kidnap someone's vehicle just because it's running red when it shouldn't be.

If you're talking about an iPhone, then you're the first person I've heard say that. Are you sure you have it switched on?

I know I'm perpetuating this Apple discussion, which is something I don't like to do, but as I see it, one of the main annoyances with Apple (putting the technical and pricing issues aside) is that the company is everywhere and continue to be invasive. Like so many other unethical companies I could name, they try to associate and attach human emotion to a gadget through arrogant, hardcore advertising, tapping into the consciousness in order to persuade. I know Apple aren't the only ones, but they are the dominant force with one of the biggest budgets to thrust their products in our faces, and nothing, nowhere and no-one is beyond their scope, even kids. Just think of the children yanking on a frustrated, financially strained parents trouser leg because the subtle use of language and imagery on the goggle box has them by their little balls. I think what Apple does is a form of exploitation, although some would disagree because we each have the free will to decide, and especially what we choose to buy. I remember when this were all fields. Grumble grumble

Dude, I'm all about feeling the love

Well, all I can say is that it is for me and others I know, not all, but enough to make it worty of mentioning. Personally, I prefer not to be so reliant on a power source and the action of plugging in to recharge when on the move. If I forget to charge by the morning and there's only half a day's charge left, then I have to find a power source and be without the phone during the charging period, which is more time out of my day compounded with the inconvenience of being out of contact for said period. So perhaps we should just agree to disagee on this point because everyone's experiences and tolerances are different.

Believe me, they can and continue to confiscate vehicles from the road when, during spot checks, said vehicles are found to be illegally using red diesel. Plenty of info about it via Google. I wouldn't underestimate VOSA. They're traffic wardens on wheels and absolute bast***s.

Not sure about that conclusion. But each to their own, hey.

If I do (which is likely) then it's because this topic seems to crop up all too often, and to be quite frank, I'm sick of it. Also, knowing that people defend Apple (as if Apple were a member of their family) despite the price and other negatives feels like listening to religious fanatics preaching. I've watched mates start up a conversation about how great Apple are and not finish talking for 30 minutes! All I could see were two ladies comparing handbags and discussing the latest soap opera gossip. It's genuinelly maddening.

Their approach to removing smoke in pubs was too severe. One half for smoking, the other for non-smoking with a partition and ventilation. The pub was a refuge, somewhere to unwind and relax. Now, they're just restaurants, with the old pool table and darts board removed to make way for more eating tables. I miss pubs. Got a lock-in last year and the barman laid a few ashtrays onto the bar. I was overcome with emotion and almost kissed him. On average use, how long exactly? Everyone I know cannot get more than 1 1/2 days max, and that's on low use with many auto-features turned off. I know, I'm a hypocrite, but I do genuinely enjoy smoking and it wasn't advertising that made me start. It's because their brand is invasive. They're a global company with a HUGE advertising arm, a brand that's so effective that it's persuaded people to continually waffle on about Apple's evolution and it's products without flinching, like some form of addiction. I suspect some people feel the need to talk about Apple products because they're so expensive, so the cost needs justification, approval from others. I'm pretty straight with my mates if they decide to wave an iPhone/iPad/iCrap in my face. I simply tell them to bugger off, then take 10 mins or so to simmer down myself. Apple will eventually fade away. Although the thought of their continued expansion across the globe fills me with dread.

I use my phone mainly for calling and texting, so the comparison is sound. If a phone that's being used for an average amount of time cannot last longer that a day without charge, then it's no good to me. I have enough to deal with without having to babysit a piece of spoonfed technology and carry a damn charger around with me wherever I go. Plus, they're quite delicate and bulky, and I'd rather a disposable phone that's cheap to replace when out in the field. Believe me, if there was a 'smart' phone (in other words, a handheld computer capable of phone calls) that lasted a minimum of 5 days without charge after general surfing, calling and texting, for around the £250 mark, then I'd snap it up. But there isn't, so I'll make do without any noteworthy consequences. Incidentially, Apple (and other manufactures) are currently able to manufacture batteries that do last 5 x longer than the current batteries, but they choose not to because they take longer to charge, which makes no sense to me. Each to their own, hey.