8 posts • joined 2 Sep 2011
Re: You know all this talk of things being more expensive
The best analysis I heard was on the BBC More or Less on Radio 4 which suggested the economic argument was about even.
The reality is
a) it is exceedingly difficult to unpick and clearly understand the results. How much tax flows to London that would be captured in Scotland.
b) Many better off/worse off arguments rely on crystal balls, How long will North Sea Oil revenue last. Will Scotland grow faster or slower.
c) Lying and and dissembling from both sides doesn't help. I suppose England might stop protecting Whisky duty but a major chunk of whisky revenue is premium, no one is going to stop paying £25 plus for a single malt because of a 10p rise in duty. Will it really make a dent in the industry?
and d) None of this unpicking and economic guesswork will be relevant in 50 years because too much else will have changed. We'll be having equally sterile arguments around would one or other country have been better off if we hadn't split. (Think Magicthighs and Broomfondle ponitification on Deep Thought's answer)
So it seems to me it should about identity, if I was a Scot I'd be asking do I feel Scottish or British? Do I feel I am less Scottish because I am part of the UK, will I gain identity by being independent?
I have no idea why you would jailbreak an Apple device. You can get as good or arguably better (depending on your needs) hardware more cheaply on an Android device that you can happily lift the hood if you want. Or you can buy an Apple device that does what it does brilliantly and fairly securely but doesn't let you do anything else; and charges you a premium for it.
Both approaches have something to say for them and both have their fans. Jailbreaking your Apple things seems to create the worst of both worlds, pay more for less security, less real root access than you get on Android and hassle every time you want to upgrade.
The sale of goods act clearly states that as I have bought from you my contract is with you.
I don't have to do all the work for you and work with the manufacturer to prove it is faulty. Warranty is extra protection above the sale of good act and you cannot force me to deal with the manufacturer or use the fact of a manufacturers warranty to overide my rights.
"If your claim is about a problem that arises within six months of buying the product, it's up to the retailer to prove that the goods were of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, or as described when it sold them."
Just becuase it "does not seems unreasonable" to you doesn't make you correct. This is typical of the attitude and traing in online companies and why we get such poor customer service.
Re: Phineas Gage....
Thank you, this was my immediate thought when I read it. Ripley's Believe it or not will have to buy his skull when he dies.
Not sure about this
To pretend this opinion piece is an objective journalistic analysis is a bit rich, here are just two emotive misrepresentations I'd like to highlight.
The Milly Dowler accusation wasn't false, it contained inaccuracies. The News of the World did use the fact that Millie Dowler hadn't changed her pin to listen to her voice mails. That is accepted and illegal. They didn't delete her voice mails which was part of but not the whole claim. Personally I'm still disgusted by that behaviour.
OFCom are not Sir Humphreys (Civil Servants responsible to ministers). They are a QUANGO (QA stands for Quasi Autonomous) which means they are not servants of the Government. They are set up to be independant of ministers to avoid exactly what some people think might have happened, that the decision was rubber stamped by a ministerial team enamoured of Mr Murdoch. You might be right, although I disagree, OFCom had overstressed the plurality point; but to present their designed independance as disobedience is simply incorrect.
It would be good if it made developers behave better
I'm tired of buying bait apps that are not obviously such. If it is free fine but I have a couple where I have paid for the app and it turns out not really to be playable without purchases. You have to check on the reviews and top in app purchases to get an idea.
While I'm not entirely happy that a parent can delegate their responsibility to Apple I do hope something makes them label the apps properly.
e.g. Labels are
No in app purchases available.
In app purchases enhance app experience but usable without.
Unplayable without in app purchases.
Not convinced these are the worst
I blame myself for not nominating Bicentennial Man.
I agree with Paul Smith above, there should have been a debate on what makes a bad film. I didn't particularly enjoy Titanic and I know people that didn't enjoy Terminator which is one of my favourites, I think an inability to recognise the difference between a bad film and one that you just don't like is a major failing here as shown by there being two chick flicks in the list.
Having said that, I've only seen 8 of the 20 for various reasons. I've studiously avoided Hitchhikers simply on the grounds that having been brought up on the radio series I have the voices in my head and I knew I'd have hated it even if it had been good.
I remeber this from about 20 years ago.
I remember this from a few years back.
In 1990 or 1991 I had to give a talk on "anything" as part of a presentation skills course. Not having a clue I picked up the most recent issue of Analog and used an article from that. What to do about space debris before we end up trapped on the planet.
I can't see anyone taking any action until we actually lose a couple of satellites. You'd think New International would be starting to lobby for NASA to go and do something given how much they rely on the technlogy.
- Hi-torque tank engines: EXTREME car hacking with The Register
- Product round-up Ten excellent FREE PC apps to brighten your Windows
- Review What's MISSING on Amazon Fire Phone... and why it WON'T set the world alight
- Product round-up Trousers down for six of the best affordable Androids
- Why did it take antivirus giants YEARS to drill into super-scary Regin? Symantec responds...