This is exactly why the NHS shouldn't have been buying in the infected blood products from the USA, where capitalist extremism means every low-life drug addict and prisoner was selling their dirty blood just to survive.

Firstly, you can't compare the general trend of the entire market in Europe with an increase on a few specific old contracts. Secondly, if they haven't had an increase in a decade then their price has come down in real terms, and unless they are increasing by 10 years worth of inflation, they still will be.

It's called inflation, it's even mentioned in the summary. This is not news, and not really tech either. Might as well report every time a unit of electricity goes up.

Like North Korea, mentioned in the summary? There isn't anywhere near $1.2bn worth of legitimate need for crypto, these services are purely to help criminals get away with their crimes. The people people running them, and profiting indirectly from those crimes, are no better.

And for all the parts of the world where the cost of Pfizer was too high, or the (very) cold chain wasn't possible. Or where you had these but wanted to roll out vaccines faster than a single supplier could give you the doses. The vaccine was good, just not quite as good as Pfizer. The BBC article on the subject includes this quote "According to independent estimates, over 6.5 million lives were saved in the first year of use alone." I think the fatalities due to side effects were somewhere around 100 people.

Except that this was the cheapest covid vaccine, and for the first year+ was sold at cost.

And CPU generation. If most people running a few years old PC that lacks one of these, but is perfectly capable of running Windows 11, where just offered the update through Windows update, they'd probably click yes. But so many people just aren't given that option, so aren't going to Win11 till they buy a new PC.

Maybe, but he's right. You buy into some new tech and there is a chance you'll have backed the wrong horse. Probably better to think of a big purchase like a car as an investment, which may go down as well as up (well cars rarely go up in value, but you know what I mean). Early adopters of EVs took a similar risk, but at least they could just charge it at home if they'd never built any public chargers.

It said there were multiple videos, and didn't suggest they were related to anything dodgy themselves. But when you get the viewing logs of these handful of videos, and find the same user account viewed them all, and at about the times you sent the links, you've got your man.

Because they connect to the CAN bus, and anything that does that basically has root access to the entire vehicle. Vehicle maker is as much to blame as the 3rd party vendor making these devices.

Actually both are very bad results, one might be worse than the other (for the person involved), but screening programmes aren't viable or acceptable if the false positive rate is high and then the follow-up for that is potentially devastating emotionally and involves lots of even more invasive tests. Lookup the widely accepted Wilson criteria for screening, which includes the need for tests to be specific as well as sensitive.

Except this has nothing to do with the NHS budget. The NMC is "financed by the fees paid by nurses, midwives and nursing associates". https://www.nmc.org.uk/globala...

I think you might be reading too much into it, it's just a story about a man trying (and failing) to steal a car. I'm not sure it's a commentary on tech vs the people.

Man tries to steal car, owner calls police, man arrested. The only reason this story exists is that it's a "robotaxi", but that seems to add nothing to the story.

Seems to be very little tech or news in this one.