The only major phone that doesn't work that way? You guessed it: Apple's iPhone.

It's ridiculous, I agree, but it's quite possibly the telephone operators who are to blame.

They've been used to selling services that they know most customers will never actually use for years. A couple of phones come onto the market that actually make use of their internet connections and boom it's network meltdown.

Blaming Apple makes no sense, why would they care about how much data you use?

At least this is the problem here in Australia. On the plus side, the introduction of the iPhone means that mobile internet packages have become much better. Even Telstra, the government created monopoly, give you more than 2MB (not a typo) per month now.

Oh and save your blah blah blah about needing a data connection...

Aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the show?

And if you disable a virus and put a very tiny amount in a vaccine, will that make you sick> No. But will it help train your immune system against it? Yes.
Wow, where to start? First of all the amount isn't tiny. It's larger than what would often be required to infect you with the live virus. Repeatedly diluting this amount would make it less effective not more yet this is how homeopathy is supposed to work. Secondly there's a well understood process involved which doesn't rely on water having a "memory" or any of the other pseudo science homeopathy practitioners like to espouse. And thirdly there's a mountain of evidence for it working that fits or understanding of biology. Where's the evidence of homeopathy working?

If it is so diluted that it no longer contains the original material, then I agree that is likely crap. However a low dilution may work.
And the evidence of a low dilution working would be? Do you believe homeopathy's claim that repeated dilution makes a solution more potent? Where is the evidence of homeopathy working?

Look it up. They don't know how dogs can detect seizures before they occur, and they dont fully understand how they can smell on the order of one part per million.

I did some googling and can't find anything that suggests there's any mystery to dogs' sense of smell that doesn't apply to all animals. Their chemoreceptors are apparently like most mammals just denser and their olfactory bulb is forty times larger than in humans. The information I can find makes smelling things in such low concentrations perfectly plausible and not subject to some as yet undetected process. What's the great mystery you're talking about? Smell is understood and has a physical basis and it really doesn't matter if we don't know how they predict seizures because there are physiological causes for them that dogs can plausibly detect. It can't be pretended that it's some kind of spooky effect that runs counter to established science. What was the physical basis for thinking homeopathy might work? Where is the evidence of homeopathy working?

Dogs can detect molecules on the order of a couple parts per million, far below our level of detection. They can also smell cancer, and can tell the difference between different kinds of internal cancer just by smelling the skin.

And your point would be? If I dilute alcohol to the limits very of detection will it still get me drunk? And what of the homoeopathic solutions which have been diluted to the point that they don't contain a single molecule of the original active ingredient?

The burden of proof is on you. There's no body of evidence to suggest homeoeopathy has any effectiveness beyond the placebo effect. NOW is when you provide the evidence and claim your Nobel prize for discrediting a fairly important scientific principle (i.e. that you need a cause for a chemical effect).

They have also been shown to be able to predict seizures, and hypoglycemic attacks.

And this matters because? There are physical precursors to seizures so it's entirely possible that a dog might be able to detect them. That's neat but how is it relevant to homoeopathy where any active ingredient has been made absent?

Most of what dogs can do we dont know how they do it because we cant detect what they can.

Er, what? We know how dogs detect those things. The chemical receptors in their noses aren't that difficult to study. There's no need to make it out as some kind of spooky trick they have.

Just because we cannot detect low levels, doesn't mean they are not there nor have any effect.

We've got lots of evidence for lowering levels reducing effects and none for lowering levels increasing effects. The burden of proof is on you. Step up and actually show it and you'll be in every chemistry textbook printed in the next thousand years.

Perhaps it's my turn to be a dick: [citation needed].

Are you implying homeopathic medicine has no effect on people? i.e. same as a placebo?

Yes of course.

Are you suggesting that a solution diluted until there are no measurable levels of any active ingredient has any effect beyond that of plain water?

If so you'd better be writing this up because you'll get Nobel Prizes for chemistry, physics and medicine. Not to mention $1,000,000 from the James Randi Education Foundation.

This is the point in the discussion where someone will either mention their great aunt's best friend who was "cured of cancer" or start warning us of a vast medical conspiracy to keep homoeopathy a secret. Bonus points go to anyone who tells us all the repeatable controlled studies into the matter are flawed for some vague reason.

[citation needed]
 
You fail AC.
 
That factoid is cited on the very place you make fun of with your homorous [citation needed]. But nevermind, here's the link for you since you weren't even willing to look at at least the Wikipedia page yourself.

Some of the tattoos are near acupuncture areas. Not only were our ancestors playing bone flutes 35,000 years ago, but were also doing primitive medicine 5300 years ago. (Note homeopathic)

His body was "littered" with tattoos and some are near acupuncture points?

Colour me surprised!

Oh, and sticking needles into people can have an actual measurable effect. Therefore it's not homeopathic. Even the WHO agrees apparently.

What's left of his skin was littered with simple cross and line markings.
 
... upon closer inspection the scientists determined this to be Chinese writing which says "Forever Protector of Old Ladies". Work to locate the man's Facebook profile and collection of popped collar shirts is continuing.

Now back to you in the studio, Dave.

Actually, you learn about bubble sort so you can understand where is might actually be a valid choice -- i.e. where you need to sort a small set in place with minimal use of stack space or other temporary storage.

Exactly! People who throw out perfectly valid algorithms because they're problematic in some cases are just as bad as people who dismiss all design patterns because they once worked with someone who didn't know when to stop using their hammer to drive in screws.

Bubble sort is also fine for situations where you know a list is nearly sorted already and you don't care about perfect sorting. I think the classic example is a virtual bird needing to know it's closest neighbours in flight. Their relative positions don't change quickly so you only need one or two passes and if you make a mistake, who cares! So long as you haven't actually clipped your neighbours wings yet you can be a bit imprecise and let the next round of movement/sorting sort things out.

Conroy and ISPs implementing the blacklist confirm that this is a fake:

It's identical to the list being extracted from filtering packages which use the ACMA list. One of the packages even stores it in a file called websites_ACMA.txt embedded into the product.

It might not be the most current version of the list but it damn well is real.

The iLiad Book Edition is a good choice. The hardware is nice and the firmware is open source. It's also very expensive.

You could also look at the BeBook. It uses the same 6" panel as everyone else, has excellent wide and open format support and the firmware is open source. It's also sold under many other names, Hanlin V3 being the most common.

I've bought a BeBook. It should last me long enough that a better and probably cheaper generation of devices will come out. There's no need to go for the top of the line models now, the technology is changing too fast.

If your primary motivation is reading not fiddling then don't bother with wireless and touch panels yet. They cut the battery life from several weeks to a few days on every model that has them.

Talking about a "good OS" is all very well, but did classic MacOS on the Macintosh 128k do these things?
It didn't need to. It never ran a multitasking version of MacOS, IIRC. I may be mistaken though.

(And indeed, although I know that modern OSs do do this, I'd be curious to see them tested in practice - how well does OS X, or any other OS come to that, run if you never ever close anything down?)
Just fine, as long as you aren't constantly switching between every application you have open. I just looked at my dock and I've got fourteen applications open and my both cores of my CPU are 95% idle. I'm probably only going to use three or four of the running applications today so everything will be just fine.

Just about all popular games also come in a DRM free version. These versions are usually called "cracked", "patched" or "warzed".

Serriously though, pirated versions of music, DVDs and games are often superior for these kinds of reasons. Buy the boxed copy and leave it in its shrink wrap then pirate it.

You're out of luck if you want to play online.