Erm - help me out here
“just $500m spent” “ biggest beneficiary to date has been Samara ($400m)” “ second place was Infarm with $170m” - where did the other -$70m go?
25 posts • joined 24 Jun 2009
"A phone's GPS accurate to roughly 15 feet, although military GPS devices can be accurate to centimeters"
I don't think this is any longer true. As I understand it, GPS signals were originally designed to be available in two flavours - a civilian one, that was made deliberately less accurate, and a military one, that had the *real* data. The reason for this was - the US military didn't want to be giving foreign powers the ability to target their cruise missiles more effectively.
Now when the gulf war came, military GPS devices were in very short supply. Several soldiers received gifts of yachting units from family and friends and were using them to navigate through Iraq - as a result of this the military decided to broadcast the civilian signals at the same accuracy as the military ones.
I like that he's actually engaging in the world of tech - albeit perhaps a tad clumsily - I do have a sense that he is passionate about it and I have no desire to discourage anyone in our country from speculative investment in IT. Presumably you're also going to do a counterpoint where you brilliantly lambast the UK culture of stifling innovation in spite of being where so much basic science happens...
I know I know...asking you to say something constructive is a bit silly...
In fairness, the Samaritans are a very well respected charity which (in the UK at least) does a huge amount of work to support those suffering from depression and other forms of mental illness and those at risk of suicide. Whilst I agree this may well be misjudged your totally made-up assessment of the organisation is wildly inaccurate.
" I don't believe that the IT industry in general is "Institutionally Sexist", it may well be male dominated, but that isn't the same thing."
The key point about Institutional Sexism (or racism, or whatever) is that it isn't a bunch of bad people doing bad things because they have not yet had their moral compasses adjusted - it's that the system is set up in such a way that it mitigates against (in this case) women making as much contribution as they otherwise might.
Your final paragraph answers it:
"So it isn't surprising that women make up a minority in IT. Would the Industry benefit from more women in the field? Quite probably, but where are they to be sourced? You can't employ somone who doesn't apply for a position and to employ someone *just* because they are female and not the best qualified/able will not improve male attutudes to women in IT."
"quite probably" seems mealy mouthed but let's let that slide - the fact that women are not going into the field, aren't studying the appropriate subjects at the appropriate level, or whatever the causes are - that's the "institutional" bit - it's not male chauvinist pigs not knowing how to relate to women (although that - sadly - still happens) - but a system which has not - yet - been set up to encourage an equal contribution from all sectors of society.
Quorn was invented way back in the day by some malthusian cynics who believed that the world was running out of cheap protein. They had evidently seen Soylent Green, read the Omen and had smoked something enlightening.
Obviously devastated to find that the food kept on failing to run out - so hit on a bonzer wheeze to make it a "health food"...what software marketing people call "the pivot". So unprepared were they for this change in focus that they only moved to using free range eggs in around 2000 - up to then all your vegger mates were eating battery farmed eggs binding together their weirdy cultured fungus proteins...
Quorn is not a health food fad - it's a bona fide science
It's totally possible to be religious and recognise the reality of evolution - any person who believes in god couldn't not believe that god wasn't involved in evolution...
The study is interesting but the "pure" evolution believers should include those who think it's god and those who don't. It is certainly possible to believe that there are other agencies to natural selection than simple random chance mutations...
OR...they should focus on the fact that he may have lied, potentially in a submission to the SEC, and that in itself would, if shown to be true, show a weakness of character (and indeed lack of judgment) which would bring his fitness for his position into question.
Having a Physics degree myself, I would never stoop so low as to claim an education in Computer Science - but if I did so on my CV, and you caught me, I'd expect a proper drubbing...
It is indeed a very emotive subject as you correctly point out - but patent is not fundamental fact of the universe, it is an artefact which societies have created to fit their purposes. It is no longer fit for purpose.
If there were a law which allowed - say - slavery, that would be an inappropriate law. You would, I'm sure, agree that fighting it was appropriate and obeying it was wrong.
Twitter is still used by a vanishingly small proportion of the population - however one of those sections is journalists, and this is really critical.
If you are a journalist on a print newspaper you probably got a degree from a top university and struggled really hard to get your job. Now you are faced with vanishing budgets, reducing headcount and a profession which is in a state of cynical despair. So where do you go for stories?
Twitter, facebook, mumsnet...and you use wikipedia to verify your sources. Big brands recognise this, which is why making complaints on twitter gets you so much better support - not because they are worried what IT savvy navel gazers like me think...but because they know if it isn't responded to, and it's a slow news day, they might get into a *proper* news source.
There seems to be a rather arbitrary approach to which products you review, which makes them a little bit...totally ****ing useless.
Your reviews are in general well written, but when they miss out really obvious products in whatever category you're reviewing, it really doesn't help me decide which one to buy, just how I should feel about what I've already bought.
Speaking of which - why didn't you include the jawbone jambox in this review. Spectacular piece of kit.
One thing which has gone uncommented so far...the new site is simply worse than the old one. There are a few stylistic things (I thought a thermometer was a much better way of showing how far I've gone to achieving my goal than a magic star) - however the one really key screwup they've made is that I used to be able to see *all* the donations on a page at once - now it shows a maximum of ten on any given page and users have to click "next" to get through each of the pages.
People look at who's donated what and typically decide how much to donate based on that. If the list doesn't show the bigger donations then people are likely to donate less. So they've (potentially at least) reduced the money which their charity customers raise.
Apart from the fact that it's a giant step back in web design - "you remember how much you used to love clicking "next" and "yes I really want to do this" when you used windows - well we can bring that experience to the web..." one assumes that the marketing people in the charity sector aren't on the marching powder so maybe that was thought up after some cider and particularly potent smokes...who knows but PLEASE FIX IT NOW!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022