I may be wrong, but 99% of the time when people say less gun crime, they mean less per head of population - so the fact Canada has fewer people is not the issue.
In the UK at least book stores do have an advantage over Amazon Kindle - for unknown reasons VAT (sales tax) at 20% is chargeable on ebooks, but not on dead tree books - so the ought to have an advantage there - Amazon also has it selling paper books over the internet, but that is not instant delivery
I think they have picked the wrong size again. The 7.9 inch does not fit in a jacket pocket, but the Nexus 7 does - the extra 1.3cm width stops it fitting.
I also think that the ideal sizes are 7 inch for portability, and maybe as big as 12 inch for home or business - I would love to read an A4 (US letter roughly) document pretty much full size (trimming the margins). The 10 inch screen does shrink it a little too much. The 10 inch is too large to be portable, too small to represent documents full size.
I understood that "Probable Cause" was a American legal term and English law used "prima facie", which, depending on circumstance, can either be a higher or lower burden of proof. The difference between them is I understand part of the problem with the US/UK extradition law - it is felt that probable cause is a lower standard in some cases.
I understand from other sources that he will get most of the money back (although by no means all me might still be out £20-£50k, no small sum for an individual).
However he did have to front £200k himself upfront, with no guarantee of recovery and lost two years of his life, which for a self employed writer is 2 years income gone.
He did have the proof to back up what he said - that the treatments were bogus. I.e. there is plenty of evidence that they did not work (more accurately no evidence that they do better than a placebo).
The original judge decided that "bogus" meant that the supplier was dishonestly lying about it too, and that was the libellous claim, and that is the appeal he won.
In any case he probably could have won the argument as he could have shown that the Chiropracters ought to have known about the studies that showed the lack of effect, and if they did not they were negligent, and if they did they were dishonest. This however was a much tougher argument, with room for scope of argument on "dishonest".
Notably the BCA had to issue warnings to members to remove claims from websites and literature as there were many making claims that could not be backed up.This suggests that he probably had a point anyway.
The effect is now that many people will not speak out against treatments without any medical value and dodgy medical claims for fear of being sued - even if they win they lose a few years of their life and earnings.
I would have thought that extracts of books on Google would be the best possible advertising that you could have for a book - you do a search, and find a useful extract from a book, naturally you want to know more, but google won't give you any more, so you follow the handy advertising link at the side and buy it off Amazon - everyone wins.
I cannot believe that google extracts are in any way damaging book sales, and therefore causing harm to the authors or publishers.
That person had a manifestly unfair trial, someone else actually admitted to the crime in question (BBC link) and thus the pardon was not hypocrisy by any stretch, just proof that a fair trial abroad is hard to get (true of foreigners in the UK as much as Brits abroad).
Sorry, I meant on fewer phone types, not fewer actual units. And in the market for phones as a whole OSX is still tiny.
My point was to correct your statement about netbooks and redirect it to phones, and that still stands, albeit with your qualifications about the success of Android on phones.
I realise that this is/., but I am sorry you felt it necessary to be sarcastic rather than constructive - I was trying to add to the debate, but I clearly failed.
In its target market of smart phones it has several major releases, and they appear to be making the news.
One might say that OSX mobile is on fewer phones than Android, and has a tiny market share, both of which are true, but in its target market it is still making a splash.
Anyway the point was that the OP was probably not talking about netbooks, but phones, which still stands.
Crab all you want about NVIDIA but they got the goods and the business strategy that put them on top.
Until, that is, millions of their mobile GPU chips keel over from heat death due to improper package bump and underfill construction.
That sounds like some wicked conjecture, have any evidence that this is impending?
I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that this referred to the problem Nvidia had with their mobile chips that led to recalls and product failures. It was fairly well documented. A quick google suggests: this is what he is referring to.
This is basically the entire teaching method of Oxford University science and maths undergraduate degrees, and even to some extent the arts courses. You have a week for 6-8 questions, have to go away find out what on earth they are talking about, have your "gotcha" moment, and then report back at the end of the week in a 2 student to one teacher tutorial.
You are not even expected to be able to do it all - you are expected to do what you can and learn from the tutorial the tricks and tweaks from what you could not.
If I had mod points I would be modding you two up simply for the most constructive conversation I have seen on slashdot for ages.
A post followed by a correction (that could be taken as the start of a war of words) and instead, an admission of error in what you had typed, a request for reference which was provided and a thank you!
Thanks for improving my view of online discussions
He does not state that there is a causal relationship, he links to a study showing that there is a correlation and says that in light of this he doubts that it can be shown that every download is lost revenue. The onus of proof is surely on the person who is making the statement, not the one doubting its veracity, and showing data at best inconsistent with the hypothesis that each download is lost revenue.
If you look at his website version of the article, he actually provides a link which reports a study showing this very fact - so I can hardly accuse him of hypocracy, for this at least.
Slashdot Mirror
Who's been reading Asterix?
I may be wrong, but 99% of the time when people say less gun crime, they mean less per head of population - so the fact Canada has fewer people is not the issue.
In the UK at least book stores do have an advantage over Amazon Kindle - for unknown reasons VAT (sales tax) at 20% is chargeable on ebooks, but not on dead tree books - so the ought to have an advantage there - Amazon also has it selling paper books over the internet, but that is not instant delivery
I think they have picked the wrong size again. The 7.9 inch does not fit in a jacket pocket, but the Nexus 7 does - the extra 1.3cm width stops it fitting. I also think that the ideal sizes are 7 inch for portability, and maybe as big as 12 inch for home or business - I would love to read an A4 (US letter roughly) document pretty much full size (trimming the margins). The 10 inch screen does shrink it a little too much. The 10 inch is too large to be portable, too small to represent documents full size.
Your second quote is from Pyramids, not Small Gods - Sorry to be pedantic!
UK has them - Three has mobile and several suppliers, notably Sky has unlimited landline
...but does this story constitute an EPIC fail?
That was ITV/Channel 4 - they still have them I think. As another poster mentioned, the BBC does not have ads
Respectively: Yes, Lots and No, but they make money of a captive content buying audience. I am not sure I understand the point here?
I understood that "Probable Cause" was a American legal term and English law used "prima facie", which, depending on circumstance, can either be a higher or lower burden of proof. The difference between them is I understand part of the problem with the US/UK extradition law - it is felt that probable cause is a lower standard in some cases.
I understand from other sources that he will get most of the money back (although by no means all me might still be out £20-£50k, no small sum for an individual). However he did have to front £200k himself upfront, with no guarantee of recovery and lost two years of his life, which for a self employed writer is 2 years income gone.
He did have the proof to back up what he said - that the treatments were bogus. I.e. there is plenty of evidence that they did not work (more accurately no evidence that they do better than a placebo). The original judge decided that "bogus" meant that the supplier was dishonestly lying about it too, and that was the libellous claim, and that is the appeal he won. In any case he probably could have won the argument as he could have shown that the Chiropracters ought to have known about the studies that showed the lack of effect, and if they did not they were negligent, and if they did they were dishonest. This however was a much tougher argument, with room for scope of argument on "dishonest". Notably the BCA had to issue warnings to members to remove claims from websites and literature as there were many making claims that could not be backed up.This suggests that he probably had a point anyway. The effect is now that many people will not speak out against treatments without any medical value and dodgy medical claims for fear of being sued - even if they win they lose a few years of their life and earnings.
Well it was, but then I measured my speed, and now my position is a little uncertain...
I would have thought that extracts of books on Google would be the best possible advertising that you could have for a book - you do a search, and find a useful extract from a book, naturally you want to know more, but google won't give you any more, so you follow the handy advertising link at the side and buy it off Amazon - everyone wins.
I cannot believe that google extracts are in any way damaging book sales, and therefore causing harm to the authors or publishers.
So what are they complaining about?
That person had a manifestly unfair trial, someone else actually admitted to the crime in question (BBC link) and thus the pardon was not hypocrisy by any stretch, just proof that a fair trial abroad is hard to get (true of foreigners in the UK as much as Brits abroad).
First rule of MSE. You DO NOT talk about MSE. Second rule of MSE...
Sorry, I meant on fewer phone types, not fewer actual units. And in the market for phones as a whole OSX is still tiny. My point was to correct your statement about netbooks and redirect it to phones, and that still stands, albeit with your qualifications about the success of Android on phones. I realise that this is /., but I am sorry you felt it necessary to be sarcastic rather than constructive - I was trying to add to the debate, but I clearly failed.
In its target market of smart phones it has several major releases, and they appear to be making the news. One might say that OSX mobile is on fewer phones than Android, and has a tiny market share, both of which are true, but in its target market it is still making a splash. Anyway the point was that the OP was probably not talking about netbooks, but phones, which still stands.
I suspect GP means Android on phones, which is being offered to phone companies and is doing ok, after a slow start.
Until, that is, millions of their mobile GPU chips keel over from heat death due to improper package bump and underfill construction.
That sounds like some wicked conjecture, have any evidence that this is impending?
I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that this referred to the problem Nvidia had with their mobile chips that led to recalls and product failures. It was fairly well documented. A quick google suggests: this is what he is referring to.
Spelt is fine in British English Spelt (2) (www.merriam-webster.com)
This is basically the entire teaching method of Oxford University science and maths undergraduate degrees, and even to some extent the arts courses. You have a week for 6-8 questions, have to go away find out what on earth they are talking about, have your "gotcha" moment, and then report back at the end of the week in a 2 student to one teacher tutorial. You are not even expected to be able to do it all - you are expected to do what you can and learn from the tutorial the tricks and tweaks from what you could not.
If I had mod points I would be modding you two up simply for the most constructive conversation I have seen on slashdot for ages. A post followed by a correction (that could be taken as the start of a war of words) and instead, an admission of error in what you had typed, a request for reference which was provided and a thank you! Thanks for improving my view of online discussions
He does not state that there is a causal relationship, he links to a study showing that there is a correlation and says that in light of this he doubts that it can be shown that every download is lost revenue. The onus of proof is surely on the person who is making the statement, not the one doubting its veracity, and showing data at best inconsistent with the hypothesis that each download is lost revenue.
If you look at his website version of the article, he actually provides a link which reports a study showing this very fact - so I can hardly accuse him of hypocracy, for this at least.