Re: El Reg faux pas
You're right. Entirely inappropriate.
Finland doesn't have school buses so why would one be on the blackboard?
314 posts • joined 23 Jan 2014
You need far more power for take off and landing than during cruise.
So much so that cruise is less efficient than it could be, if you could use a couple of smaller jets and then add in electric fans for extra power when you need it you could improve fuel economy by a couple of percent.
NASA are trying another approach, using a smaller wing which is fine for cruise but then adding electric fans to increase the airspeed over the wing during take off and landing to gain the extra lift required. - https://www.nasa.gov/specials/X57/index.html
"Based upon our investigation, Virgin Media does believe that the database was accessed on at least one occasion but we do not know the extent of the access or if any information was actually used."
Given that they know the security researchers accessed it what Virgin Media's CEO Lutz Schüler actually said last night was 'We have no logs for this server or for the network routing to it so have no way of knowing if, or how often, this information was accessed.'
'A US Food and Drug Administration handbook shows that US food standards allow for:
Rat hairs in paprika
Rat droppings in ginger
Insect fragments in peanut butter
Maggots in orange juice.
The US suggests that these are unlikely to be harmful to human health provided the levels are fairly low.
We (UK & EU) suggest that we'd rather not have them present, and err on the side of caution.'
This is not true. These are levels at which the US inspectors are legally required to prosecute - at levels below this they can caution or prosecute as they think appropriate. In the EU inspectors are never required to prosecute and can caution at any level of contamination.
The article says...
'...Galileo was one of those moments of awakening when UK lawmakers realised that if you leave a club, you also lose access to its toys....'
...and yet earlier...
'...it appears the UK will have access to the Public Regulated Service (PRS) of Galileo required by the military...'
'The question is though, "is it a public path". It was never officially designated a public path, but people have been using it for years.... ...The state's argument seems to be that there's always been free access there so surely that must continue...'
It's common law. Essentially if something has been going on for so long that it's normal, then it's normal.
Well, if it's correctness you're after then '50% of the electorate of your country are below average (mean) intelligence.' is an impossible statement to make, for instance 100% of the electorate could have the same intelligence, in which case 0% would be below the median.
'..commercial aircraft can perform the equivalent of selecting a postcode in the sat-nav, pressing 'go' and sitting back and watching. A Hawker Siddeley Trident performed the first fully automatic landing way back in 1964...'
And they absolutely will not make any attempt to avoid crashing into things.
'So here's to live crash-test dummies'
Actually you might be on to something. Rich countries have low road fatality rates. Poor countries have high road fatality rates. If rich countries provided cars to poor countries they could raise the standard of living and self driving behavior would quickly become safer than the local human drivers.
'As Starbucks UK is owned by Starbucks US - the answer is zero. Internal IP transfer pricing should be deemed to be zero'
I don't know about the US but the UK comes under EU law, which means it must apply internal transfer pricing and that pricing must be in line with the costs that would be incurred if the licence were held by a 3rd party.
The EU did fine Starbucks over it's transfer pricing, and Starbucks won on appeal.
'Let's ignore unicycles'
I thought that too. Then I remembered that tariffs don't just appear. We're paying bureaucrats salaries so that they can decide how much more expensive becoming a clown should be.
You're happy with a tariff on Apples to protect Orchard owners and workers? Fine, but what about cider makers? What about bakers? What about green grocers? What about super market workers? You've made all of those industries more expensive and therefore harmed their workers. Why is that fair?
If orchards don't pay well enough then perhaps there should be fewer orchards? Or they should be more efficient. Or they should concentrate on premium products.
The US and Aus were two countries I picked as being culturally similar to the UK and English speaking so I had a chance of finding and understanding their tariffs. And frankly it was enough hassle traipsing through those three that I couldn't be bothered to look for any others.
In growing, no. Which is why importing unprocessed coffee is tariff free.
In processing, packaging and retailing, yes. Which is why importing processed coffee is not free.
(in fairness, there have been moves to reduce/remove the tariff for processed coffee from poorer countries, helping their growth)
Tariff schedules are big and complex things. But as examples
Unicycles - US 0%, EU 15%, Aus 0%
Apples - US 0, EU 125Euro/100kg, Aus 0
Coffee, roasted, not-decaf - US 0%, EU 7.5%, Aus 0%
'Yes, the EU is protectionist. So are almost all countries and trading blocks in the world.
So I'm unsure what the point of leaving such protections behind is.'
The only thing that unites us all is that we are consumers. Therefore every decision should prioritise consumers over producers. So less tariffs are always better than more, and no tariffs are best of all.
Yes the consumer will be the one paying, but the very fact that it becomes value driven (the more people are willing to pay for the service the more of the bandwidth we can buy) will cause a more efficient allocation of resources and a correspondingly greater value to the consumers then if it had been left to the tragedy of the commons.
'It seems to me that no one is much worried about people in the gig economy on good money; it's only those exploited at the bottom of the payscale that need protection.'
So you have to ask yourself why do people capable of earning good money choose to do so as independent contractors? And from there ask yourself if those at the low end are really being exploited or they simply don't have the skills to be higher up the pay scale.
Force a business to pay more than the job is worth and eventually the job just doesn't exist.
Because regulation stifles innovation.
You might have an idea that's better than twitter. But can you then afford the campus of 5,000 reviewers to remove inappropriate content? The department of 50 AI developers and the associated data centre to process all content and mark it for review before the public sees it? And then cope with differing legislation? There are things that are illegal to say in Germany but perfectly legal in The Netherlands. How good is your GPS? And your maps?
So now as soon as you get any larger than a tiny minnow you're going to have to throw money at all these problems. Still think you're getting that 3rd round of VC funding?
There's a good reason why twitter etc. now accept regulation is necessary. It's not because they've suddenly decided they have a social responsibility. It's because it's a tool in making sure no-one does to Facebook what Facebook did to myspace.
'...And the solution to the message in the battery health settings screen is to simply ignore it...'
And the next OS update when '..for your safety unauthenticated batteries will charge at a limited rate. Visit your Apple service centre for a replacement genuine authentic high quality battery'
It's taxpayers money. Specifically 5.9 million euros of taxpayers money. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/220023/factsheet/en
'...Main project goals are to provide an open reference architecture for the support of IoT in the lighting infrastructure, build consensus reflecting the best architectural choices, contribute to standardization of lighting and telecom infrastructures in IEC, IETF, IEEE and ITU-T and provide a roadmap for IoT until 2022 and beyond...'
5.9m euros to attend some conferences, draw up a powerpoint and write a spec. no one will ever use.
To quote Milton Friedman 'I’m sure going to have a good lunch!'
Hidden in the tax watch 'research' are these weasel words...
'...and unnamed qualifying Rockstar employees...'
So it's not a 'how do we get the money out' scheme, it's an employee reward scheme. Rather common in industries where revenue can swing wildly.
'It is not known whether and how much UK income tax has been paid by the principals on these profit shares'
Except of course it wasn't just the principals. It was normal employees paying UK income tax on their bonuses. As income tax is higher than corporation tax there's a fair chance the UK arm of Rockstar was responsible for more tax payments than if it had retained profits and paid corporation tax.
Still, when your future as a think tank is governed by how many column inches of outrage you can generate then actual facts are just collateral damage.
On one hand, if something is toxic, it can be harmful even at smaller amounts than that, so of course it's anyway a good idea to minimise plastic pollution in any form.
Careful there, I think you just tripped over Chesterton's fence. If the number of lives extended by plastics are greater than the number shortened then minimising them is a bad idea. There's a reason we package so much food in plastics.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020