Re: Gah!!
Cassette!? You were lucky. We used t' dream of games on cassette. In my day, games came in magazine form. We spent 27 hours a day typin' in t'code, only to have a syntax error on line 130...
1972 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jul 2011
Yes, and Apple...
and Acer, Amazon, Cisco , Dell, HP, Intel, Microsoft , Motorola, Nintendo, Nokia, Sony, Toshiba, and Vizio to name a few more of Foxconn's customers...
and who amongst us have bought from none of these brands? mote, beam, first stone, etc.
According to the firm, Zhang needs to have a disability assessment...
Makes sense.
Employees in China who are disabled ... can get compensation payouts ...once their disability is assessed and graded by a panel of medical experts.
Makes sense.
... but that means that he needs to leave hospital in Shenzhen and travel 70km to Huizhou...
Ah, now here is the part I don't understand.
Why does the assessment have to happen in Huizhou? Are there no medical experts in or around the Shenzhen hospital that are capable of performing this assessment? Failing that, are the panel in Huizhou incapable of travel?
...Apple maintains a view that a phone's display should be easily navigated with just one thumb...
I don't disagree with this idea -- but I can easily navigate a phone with a display a full inch wider than the iPhone5 with my thumb, due to my hands being larger than average. So, like Woz, I consider the iPhone5 somewhat narrow.
Other companies and industries address human variation by either making multiple sizes (e.g, shoes, gloves, other tablets/phones) or adjustable systems (e.g, car seats), whereas Apple seems to consider it a case of the user not fitting the product, rather than the other way around.
I wonder if you could hold MS liable for false accusations when they take down your website based on these fake allegations.
Yes. Filing a false DMCA takedown request is considered perjury. That's one thing the DMCA has got right -- google "dmca penalty false request" for some good examples of what you can lose by filing a false DMCA takedown request.
The state also has a terrible track record of inefficiencies, vested interests, unintended consequences and sometimes plain corruption in the provision of these services.
Alternatives are organisations such as charities, churches/mosques/temples, friends, families, local groups etc, all of which are closer to the intended recipient so less layers of bureaucracy taking their slice of the pie, better targeted to needs and perhaps more appreciation by the recipient of where this help has come from. There can still be inefficiencies and corruption but less layers of bureaucracy give less scope for these.
You don't need more than one layer of bureaucracy for corruption and/or inefficiency. Furthermore, I can cite examples of all of the types of organizations you mention which have incredibly poor track records. I think you'll find that there hasn't been a study truly comparing the efficiency and honesty of the above social services organizations, states included.
An even more hated (by the left) alternative is that leaving the money that would otherwise be taxed for social services in the pockets of people and business then perhaps they can even fund more JOBS for the poor!!!
That same old trickle-down line has been tried by Conservatives for the past three decades. It hasn't worked yet.
People are by nature corrupt. Those with the money and the power got there either a) by being more corrupt than their competition, or b) by inheriting their position from corrupt family/friends.
This is why pure socialism doesn't work: it doesn't account for corruption. Pure capitalism, on the other hand, rewards corruption. Any social, economic, and/or political system must be a blend of the two to survive.
Skeptic - someone who doesn't blindly accept what they are told but examines all the evidence available at the time and makes a reasoned decision.
Deniers - someone who does blindly accept refuses to believe what they are told, and reads only the 'evidence' that supports their bias regardless of any evidence.
Your got the first one right; I was rather disappointed to see you get the second one so wrong.
Comparing OLED to 4K is like comparing carbon fibre to bicycles.
No, it's more like comparing a high-end engine to a 0-60 rating. The first is the technology, the second is the capability.
To see how the comparison works, you need to think like a marketer's image of a stereotypical buyer (i.e, not at all.) Forget what the OLED and 4K are or do or mean, and just think of them as buzzwords. Then you can formulate the proper shyster marketer's question: will enough marks consumers pay an obscene premium for something labeled "4K" over the year or two to make it a de facto standard before the "OLED"-sellers can get a "Full HD" system out the door, thus precluding them from gaining enough market share to make "OLED" the de-facto standard, which would foreclose on "4K" sales?
You don't understand, Fashtas. El Reg is never wrong. So when they originally misread Google's announcement, reality changed so that Google's announcement itself was wrong.
Google then had to change the announcement in order to make it consistent with what they'd actually done, in order to prevent their servers becoming out of sync with the new reality. Since Google's servers are so many and so well distributed, the shear forces would have ripped a hole in the fabric of reality big enough to swallow the planet.
Since The Register's re-mis-interpretation is in line with Google's actual changes, the space-time rupture has been prevented. For now.
I'll agree it's worrying but at the risk of playing devil's advocate here; how many companies do you know of that publish the financial specifics of their licensing deals?
Devil's advocate is quite right. How many companies do you know of that publish the financial specifics of their licensing deals -- vs -- how many should?
Real scientists treat *systematic* differences between their models and reality as a clue their model is *incomplete*, and needs revision, not something to add (yet another) fudge factor to.
1. A model is by definition incomplete. If it were complete, it would be the thing it models.
2. Revision is the process of making changes to a model based on evidence that the model is not producing accurate results. This includes, among other things, identifying and including additional relevant factors. Setting aside your unscientific and unfounded pejorative term "fudge", this is indeed what climate scientists do.
3. The most suspect model is the one which always matches physical reality. It means either that the system being modeled is simple enough that a model is not necessary, or that there is a good chance that either the observations or the results are being manipulated to produce the "perfect" match.
PS. Real commentards use HTML.
We've got a patent on "A system of improving average wealth through infrastructure development. The system may include roads, irrigation, telecommunications, or anything else which may actually help a developing nation." You'll have to stop all development until you license under our very Fair and Reasonable terms of 99 percent (of gross) per capita.
This is Firefox's legacy, and it's too often obscured by the waxing and waning of market share numbers. So today when we use Chrome, Opera or even Safari, we should thank Mozilla and the community that enabled this choice.
So Mozilla enabled my choice of a browser that was developed 8 years before Mozilla existed? (see http://www.opera.com/company/) Since I was already using Opera when Firefox 1.0 came out, I never had a reason to switch.
"Microsoft is working hard to convince developers to make apps for Windows 8"? This was probably written by a journalist who thinks "App" is short for Apple...
So you honestly believe that a journalist intended to write that Microsoft wants to convince developers to make apples for Windows?
It's not their fault. Vast improvements in battery power have been made in the last few decades.
But every time your "publicity whore(s)" go and make a better battery, instead of using it properly so it'll last longer, you just go and put more load on it and charge it improperly.
Now, if you took your iPhone battery and hooked it to an actual phone (say a Nokia 3310), the battery would last for about 60 years!
Samsung chips evicted...
The unit iFixit acquired contained Flash storage from Hynix, and 1GB of LPDDR 2 memory, built into the A6 CPU package, from Elpida.
Surely Apple sources standard parts such as Flash and DRAM from multiple suppliers? One phone not having Samsung parts doesn't necessarily indicate no phones having any Samsung parts..
"The goal should be to encourage translation of scientific terms into understandable concepts, rather than to indulge jargon by creating its own forum."
This sentence underlines the assumption in the entire quote in the article, and the wishful thinking in the article itself: that you can translate highly technical information into plain language, which non-experts can absorb and understand within the time span of, e.g, a jury trial lasting less than an year, without losing some important detail.
That is absurd on its face.
SIM-less works fine if the consumer is in control. But if the operators are in control then it's a bad idea.
Apple's idea was to let the consumer sign up for network access via iTunes as easily as just buying a song or downloading a movie.
So, that would be moving from the operators being in control to Apple being in control... more of a lateral move than an improvement, methinks...
"No evidence has been put forward to suggest that the reading is incorrect, merely supposition.
I think rather the evidence suggesting the reading might be correct has been shown to be suspect.
There is no "benefit of the doubt" clause in scientific measurement. If there's significant reason to believe a measurement is suspect, it's expunged. In this case, we have a single measurement, without corroboration, with known complicating factors.
Less lines of code = less bugs and easier maintenance.
Please stop repeating this bullshit.
In the first place, the complexity of code hasn't been measured in lines since before the first obfuscated C contest.
In the second place, any adequately incompetent coder can code one crap line just as easily as one thousand.