Riiiight...... Because cabs are regularly used by impoverished people who can't afford smartphones.
In London, black cabs are licensed by city hall (transport for london) as individuals. They ply for hire. And they increasingly use Hailo, which tfl is very happy for them to do. And it's an outstanding app and will hopefully put Addison Lee back in their box
No need for licensing to operate in this stupid way in NYC
for the brits among you, there's a fantastic skit along just these lines in the latest episode of The Revolution Will Be Televised, which was on last night on BBC3
Why do people speak with such authority when talking complete and utter codswallop? Of course there are design patents in the automotive industry. It takes no more than a few seconds with google to find that out. Why say something so stupidly wrong? And why write in such pompous terms? Eg "I put it to you", as though you took silk at 35; "the Scientific Method" with ridiculous faux-German capitalisation; "if you are of rational mind", as if you were a polemicist of the stature of a Christopher Hitchens. It doesn't make your argument any more convincing, but it does make you look more of a twat when you've got your basic factual assertion so demonstrably wrong. It also sits uneasily with a post that's littered with spelling, grammatical and syntactical errors.
Oh god, this sort of horseshit is just infuriating...google fashion IP rules. Then piss off and read the links. Of course fashion is protectable and of course copying is a big problem
That's not quite what I meant, though. I didn't mean "are there any studies which purport to show that 1 in 5 women have orgasms during rape?". I meant "The poster has claimed that "the" research shows this, ie that it is overwhelmingly clear from the literature. That is a bold claim and one that needs substantiating." The kind of citation he'd need here is not a random study or two, it's a meta-analysis -- a Cochrane-equivalent.
No, *apparently according* to some research, unless you can provide the cites.
Anyhoo, you know how claims that go counter to the accepted evidence base are subject to more stringent testing in science? eg claims of room temperature fusion. Seems to me that this is an area where a bit of additional skepticism is similarly warranted.
Tell you what, mate: I wish there was a way to keep illiterate racists like you from breeding. That would certainly clean up the gene pool a bit.
I guess the saving grace of reading your specious piles of twattery that imply, among many other fallacies, that there has ever been a reliable method of assessing the average intelligence of entire continental populations, is that the grammatical, syntactical and spelling errors with which you litter your tawdry little screeds conclusively demonstrate that intraracial variation in intelligence is a much more important effect than inter-racial variation.
Priceless. You make a snarky remark about invention not being the same as marketing *in direct response to someone* saying "bringing a product to market at reasonable cost". I point out that this a complete non sequitur, and you say I'm being pedantic. After you've publicly humiliated yourself by failing to recognise the very quote you originally responded to, of course.
It seems that not only did you need it explaining that marketing is very much less than bringing a product to market; not only are you incapable of reading carefully before replying; but you also don't understand even now what it takes to bring a product to market and how it is a fundamental part of any worthwhile invention that it can actually be brought to market ( or into mass use if noncommercial) economically.
The obvious alternative is to developing a product is to wait, as you go on to say. In doing so, you lose time but save money (the development costs). But if everybody waits....the market slows down. Hence IP. Honestly, this is not that tricky to understand!
Well, I have an x220-t for work which I'm obliged to use and it's awful. Just awful. Hinges are wobbly. Screen flexes. Battery lasts no time at all -- an hour or two at best. Fan runs the whole time and it gets boiling. Weighs a bloody ton and an awkward shape. Small screen given the overall dimensions of the machine. The backlight has never worked. The trackpad doesn't autodisable when I'm typing, and that textured surface is horrible to use (and I've never been able to use the trackpoint efficiently, moves much too slowly for my liking). Etc...
Can we just be clear that Matt Ridley is not merely the author of "The Rational Optimist", as his Wired byline so coyly puts it. Matt Ridley is also the self-described economic liberal who demonstrated the marvellous worth of his particular brand of this political philosophy by chairing Northern Rock during the period leading up to its catastrophic collapse; a well-known climate change denier; and a believer in radical change who just also happens, unblushingly, to be the 5th Viscount Ridley.
At least when it happened at Overend and Gurney, the directors got put on trial, even if they were acquitted. Now people who are demonstrably incapable of running commercial organisations successfully have the effrontery to continue to spout their drivel in public. He should be spending his time selling off his personal assets to compensate the poor sods who lost out through NR, not wittering about optimism and technofixes.
Slashdot Mirror
Riiiight...... Because cabs are regularly used by impoverished people who can't afford smartphones.
In London, black cabs are licensed by city hall (transport for london) as individuals. They ply for hire. And they increasingly use Hailo, which tfl is very happy for them to do. And it's an outstanding app and will hopefully put Addison Lee back in their box
No need for licensing to operate in this stupid way in NYC
for the brits among you, there's a fantastic skit along just these lines in the latest episode of The Revolution Will Be Televised, which was on last night on BBC3
Um. About your sig.
The phrase is "to all intents and purposes". And "who cares" would never have been "whom cares" in the first place.
Sheesh.
I know that's the Italian name for it, but it's better to use the term Ladin instead, to avoid confusion with Judeo-Spanish (Ladino)
Except that the evidence is unequivocal that juries are more likely to acquit than magistrates.
Why do people speak with such authority when talking complete and utter codswallop? Of course there are design patents in the automotive industry. It takes no more than a few seconds with google to find that out. Why say something so stupidly wrong? And why write in such pompous terms? Eg "I put it to you", as though you took silk at 35; "the Scientific Method" with ridiculous faux-German capitalisation; "if you are of rational mind", as if you were a polemicist of the stature of a Christopher Hitchens. It doesn't make your argument any more convincing, but it does make you look more of a twat when you've got your basic factual assertion so demonstrably wrong. It also sits uneasily with a post that's littered with spelling, grammatical and syntactical errors.
Spot on. Mod up. This is the history of uk fraud prosecution debates
http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/everyday-innovations/zipper.htm
Et voila
Oh god, this sort of horseshit is just infuriating...google fashion IP rules. Then piss off and read the links. Of course fashion is protectable and of course copying is a big problem
And whaddya know... There are several patents dating back 100 years for sardine cans....
Sounds like you have a problem with the very idea of a design patent...
A comfy chair that almost certainly - sadly - has parts made by labourers working in worse conditions for less money than the Foxconn people
That's not quite what I meant, though. I didn't mean "are there any studies which purport to show that 1 in 5 women have orgasms during rape?". I meant "The poster has claimed that "the" research shows this, ie that it is overwhelmingly clear from the literature. That is a bold claim and one that needs substantiating." The kind of citation he'd need here is not a random study or two, it's a meta-analysis -- a Cochrane-equivalent.
What the fuck are you on about? You said "according to the research". I'm asking you, "what research are you referring to?"
Are you being stupid or obtuse? You're the one making this dubious claim. Pony up, shut up, or continue to look like an almighty cock in public.
No, *apparently according* to some research, unless you can provide the cites.
Anyhoo, you know how claims that go counter to the accepted evidence base are subject to more stringent testing in science? eg claims of room temperature fusion. Seems to me that this is an area where a bit of additional skepticism is similarly warranted.
Tell you what, mate: I wish there was a way to keep illiterate racists like you from breeding. That would certainly clean up the gene pool a bit.
I guess the saving grace of reading your specious piles of twattery that imply, among many other fallacies, that there has ever been a reliable method of assessing the average intelligence of entire continental populations, is that the grammatical, syntactical and spelling errors with which you litter your tawdry little screeds conclusively demonstrate that intraracial variation in intelligence is a much more important effect than inter-racial variation.
Priceless. You make a snarky remark about invention not being the same as marketing *in direct response to someone* saying "bringing a product to market at reasonable cost". I point out that this a complete non sequitur, and you say I'm being pedantic. After you've publicly humiliated yourself by failing to recognise the very quote you originally responded to, of course.
It seems that not only did you need it explaining that marketing is very much less than bringing a product to market; not only are you incapable of reading carefully before replying; but you also don't understand even now what it takes to bring a product to market and how it is a fundamental part of any worthwhile invention that it can actually be brought to market ( or into mass use if noncommercial) economically.
"Bring a product to market at a reasonable cost" !="Marketing".
I can't believe you needed that explaining to you.
The obvious alternative is to developing a product is to wait, as you go on to say. In doing so, you lose time but save money (the development costs). But if everybody waits....the market slows down. Hence IP. Honestly, this is not that tricky to understand!
Well, I have an x220-t for work which I'm obliged to use and it's awful. Just awful. Hinges are wobbly. Screen flexes. Battery lasts no time at all -- an hour or two at best. Fan runs the whole time and it gets boiling. Weighs a bloody ton and an awkward shape. Small screen given the overall dimensions of the machine. The backlight has never worked. The trackpad doesn't autodisable when I'm typing, and that textured surface is horrible to use (and I've never been able to use the trackpoint efficiently, moves much too slowly for my liking). Etc...
Can we just be clear that Matt Ridley is not merely the author of "The Rational Optimist", as his Wired byline so coyly puts it. Matt Ridley is also the self-described economic liberal who demonstrated the marvellous worth of his particular brand of this political philosophy by chairing Northern Rock during the period leading up to its catastrophic collapse; a well-known climate change denier; and a believer in radical change who just also happens, unblushingly, to be the 5th Viscount Ridley.
At least when it happened at Overend and Gurney, the directors got put on trial, even if they were acquitted. Now people who are demonstrably incapable of running commercial organisations successfully have the effrontery to continue to spout their drivel in public. He should be spending his time selling off his personal assets to compensate the poor sods who lost out through NR, not wittering about optimism and technofixes.
Only to the dim of mind. The rest of us are pretty capable of distinguishing a hummer from a beetle or a mini
Well, given that people argue about whether society even exists as a meaningful thing.....
That's easy, is it? You have a different understanding of that word from me.
Applying the scientific method to society is a category error.