Re: On the plus point
Like the Sony FES U? Alas, only available in Japan.
621 posts • joined 13 Aug 2007
Like the Sony FES U? Alas, only available in Japan.
It may (or may not) fall under "successor liability":
"... successor liability is most commonly litigated under the “de facto merger” exception. In general, the de facto merger doctrine creates successor liability when the transaction between the purchasing and selling companies is in substance, if not in form, a merger... A court is more likely to find successor liability under de facto merger doctrine when the Seller discontinued its operations or dissolved soon after the asset sale occurred"
"Best for task" includes engineering concerns of "what do my (relevant) programmers already know", "how much time to take over this job" and "can the team maintain the system".
Mixing languages is in many cases antithetical to all three (though not all obviously).
You might have to ask the judge for guidance each and every time whenever answering (or not answering) a question. Alas, the jury likely wouldn't be able to infer why as they aren't El Reg readers!
Stenography is your friend.
Skyscanners owners' interest is obvious indeed.
But what benefit to Ctip, if indeed operations are kept separate? Either the "separate" bit is just fluff or the acquisition should have been by investors (who may or may not be very similar to those that own Ctip).If they have more cash than they can usefully reinvest, then pay dividends and let their shareholders decide where the cash should be reinvested (if at all).
When companies buy other companies without the intent of integrating them, (typically because they want to broaden their base for greater stability or to reduce market competition), they stifle market-led evaluation of their core product and so stop the ability of markets to move capital from bad companies to good ones. Thus grow overly-large monolithic shoddy companies with market-distorting power that provide little-to-no market/social/customer benefit.
An acquisition not to improve either companies products then: so what gain to whom?
The lack of support for SVG in browser tech has long been a mystery to me. It's hardly new tech.
<Pedantry> While it is in charge, it is the driver: you are a passenger. >/Pedantry>
They also seemingly haven't accounted for the order of scenarios which I suspect will influence outcomes. Perhaps they are watching that too but they make no mention of it.
Re. directors: not breaking the law trumps the shareholders.
Well, allegedly anyway.
As an aside, I wonder if Zelazny's Amber will be ruined by USA "political puns" for the next few years?
First the marketers came with their intrusive band-hogging ads.
Then the governments with their hoovers.
So now it only gets used for texts, phone calls and browsing news-pages/forums, all of which can be done on landfill android.
So why pay for anything else?
In all honesty: more leg room, more arse-room, atmospheric pressure.
Zoom zoom will be great too, but it isn't top of the pile.
While this is a design book, it is not about the design team, the creative process, or product development. It is a veblen-good that enables you to preen even more than your hipster rival next door. We suggest leaving your apple watch beside the book for a double-whammy.
They are of course wrong.
Not a bad test, the actual test being "Have we implemented sensible limits on the number of recipients in to/cc/bcc fields?"
Sadly the result was "Fail".
Don't you just hate that shit?
Does anyone read it without thinking "f*** *ff" quietly in the heads?
Re Linux Mint as a home OS, I long ago abandoned having a printer at home. Too expensive and took up a whole bunch of room for almost no benefit. Online print-and-delivery works fine and is cost-effective. Granted there is the once-a-year or so boarding-card printed in the office but other than that, I suffer no pangs for the departed ink/$$$ vampire,
The main reason is to reduce the reliance on the OS.
The main cost is the reliance on "current" browsers, who may pull the rug-out at any time without warning which leads to the still-existent IE6 stuff still hanging around.
The hardening of standard libraries rarely seems to happen, so one can only assume there's no money in it. Which is likely because there are few costs in getting pawned (to those that wrote/maintain/use such libraries).
Solutions? The private sector is never going to fix this without being forced by litigation which won't happen. Alternatives? Perhaps a gov (or international body) backed bounty on bugs in OS libraries? The NSA/GCHQ reporting the flaws they find rather than using them? Browsers implementing the recent Android-esque "No permissions on this run until you ask" (nags are annoying, but who really needs the web to talk to their printer more than once in a blue moon?). Others...?
Already been done; already failed.
Given the Pixel's price point, can this really be seen as a volume product?
And should it be niche rather than volume, does it still represent a "best-practice" example phone for other OEMs to follow rather than a serious challenge?
HR and marketing types have best people?
Her criticisms and indeed examples do not demonstrate her declared target.
Not that the tech industry isn't full of them, but not because it is the tech industry.
High frequency trading: what true value does it bring as opposed to paper-only gains?
An impossibility I'm sure, but I'm sure that slowing down trading stocks/shares rather than speeding them up might bring the useful pressure to "know what the hell you are buying/selling".
No bad design?
Never used Lotus Notes then?
My initial instinct would be to agree: but it is likely that in order to demonstrate a solid selection process, the public need to see what was not selected to ensure a clearly better bid was not overlooked. Potentially this could be voluntary on the side of the failed bidder(s) as, if their bid was fair / better, then allowing the publication of that bid could be an effective tool in forcing the selection to be more honest in future - potentially even allowing for an appeal process.
Exclusions for commercial confidentiality on a public contract simply has to end. Too many cosy deals with public employees coming from / going to the external companies in question.
If you want to do public work, then expect the public to see what you are up to.
Long-term this should help other companies effectively compete and force the public sector selection process be explained fully and clearly (we picked the third most expensive options as they were the first bid capable of delivering their proposal - here's our working).
Researchers could do so in collaboration with the NHS if additional medical data was eventually added - I suspect phase I as it stands would take them a good decade!
But never allow access to the raw data: only on-NHS-site controlled access to the limited fields required and no copying/caching thereof, after an open consultation on the public benefit to the research being carried out at all. Making tax money is not enough: its either target positive health outcomes that are reasonably accessible by the public or no access.
Or not. I've only spent a minute thinking it up!
For example: Opt-in might need to be more refined than an all-or-nothing setting, allowing opt-in for specific records (x-rays of fractures for example) and assuming opt-out of any other record. This all gets very complex very quickly, so build something very simple first!
Patient opt-in system
Patient must be able to opt-out after opt-in
Get Patient's GP's phone number
Encryption, access control and access/change logging etc. implemented from day 1
Extendable system but no *requirement* for any other data <otherwise every health professional wants all their data file formats to be "standards" in the UK-wide database - never going to happen; queue massive bun-fight and resistance and another £8m down the drain>
Set up a charity to hold and manage the data, who's charter is inviolate and does not permit sharing data outwith the NHS *ever* (ever isn't possible really, but using a charitable "buffer" makes it harder for some future douchebag parliament to play fast-and-loose with the data)
Get that system working reliably and then come back for more if you make it...
What purposes *will* it be used for?
Given Google's tendency to loose interest in their latest this-that-or-the-other, how many developers will take the risk that working in this new environment is worth it over the long haul?
The usual line is "Google did not make anyone available for comment" or the like.
Google itself was (most likely) available for comment but chose not to make one.
Who cares? Beer for everybody!
As indeed did I .My very next thought was "but it isn't April 1st."
It's considerably worse than the London 2012 / Lisa Simpson shocker.
We once had a neighbour who's burglar alarm suffered similarly, though it was wet weather that it suffered from. It took months of phoning the police to check-up on the "break-in" (particularly after they had asked us to stop) until such time as the police decided the bother of getting the owner to fix their alarm was less than the bother of talking to us again.
Why is the cable identifying itself as anything other than "USB-C compliant"?
Any information beyond that should be between the things connected by the cable...?
(Answer is very likely an over-engineered "cable" but it would be nice to know in what way!)
That is all.
A fundraiser for an organisation with more money than it knows what to do with.
Other than trying to get even more of course.
"The Nexus 5 ... doesn't have the hardware chops to run the new operating system."
Is it not possible to write a better OS that doesn't have an even greater hardware requirement than its forbears? Or just not desirable?
Art imitating life eh? Who knew?!
"IICSA would not name the head of security nor was it prepared to detail the staffer's qualifications or experience"
Name of person? A senior role in a public office equals no expectation of privacy.
Qualifications? Absolutely no expectation of privacy.
It certainly looks like FOI should apply to the structure of the body (though not their evidence / deliberations thereon obviously)
Until enough web owners are made bankrupt for allowing 3rd parties access to their customers, this will never stop. The ad companies might not like it, but we are long past the point where ads can be delivered without being vetted by somebody who's job is on the line.
In the age of streaming, DVD sales are doing very well despite being an even more "forgotten" format. Blu ray's higher price is worth it for films with hi-level special effects, but otherwise why pay 30%+ over the DVD cost for pretty much the same viewing experience?
You've still got to get the power to the light so the wiring behind the plaster isn't going anywhere.
I thought similarly at first glance but the Falkirk wheel is really a super-duper lock rather than an super duper aqueduct. Super, duper regardless though!
Is it only me that would rather NextCloud?
Though it sure look like it...
Oh well, scratch that then.
And the sue the Irish judiciary for acceding to political interference.
Questions only: I have not worked in this area myself.
The "type 2" example seems to assume that Customer_Name is unique and fixed, else one could not traverse from the current record to a previous record unless one also adds a previous Customer_ID column, which would make it "not type 2". What did I miss here?
As for the type 6 example, is that Current_Flag column really worth the extra column when the data is derivable from the End_Date column? Would a Date/Time test on End_Date be notably slower than a bool check on Current_Flag Y/N? Would that depend if the date was a string or a DateTime?