If you think all strings can be defined as const char arrays, then your experience with C programming must be very limited. The vast majority of strings in use in real world programs are neither const, nor defined as arrays.

For things of this scale, yes. For smaller things, there are also units of Black Cabs and Pints of Lager (the latter being probably the most consistently regulated unit of measure in the world).

Let me help YOU: search for trigraphs on Wikipedia.

Perhaps because the Production domain does not trust the Developers domain? And nor should it. Seriously - developers working directly on the production servers?

sizeof(string) (I may have got the name of the function wrong) returns the length of a single byte rather than the length of the entire string.

Not quite, it should return the size of a memory pointer on the target machine, since that is what a "string" is in C.

Business to business commerce is fundamentally different than consumer commerce. If you buy something as a consumer, it is reasonable to expect that all licensing etc is taken care of, and there are laws to protect you from liability (plus it would be prohibitively expensive to go after all the individual consumers rather than the manufacturer). But business to business, they can contract how they want when it comes to patents that only cover specific uses of a product, not the manufactured product itself. There is no collusion to avoid patents, Qualcomm merely states in their contract that the purchase of their part does not include third party patent licenses that may be required for certain usage of the product. It is then up to Samsung to do their homework and find out what patents they need to license. They may also offer patent indemnification at a higher part price, but for a large company like Samsung with its own staff of patent lawyers, and its own patents that can be cross licensed, it will almost always be cheaper to handle the licensing themselves.

I am not a lawyer, but I find it hard to believe Samsung is violating any of Nvidia's patents directly by using Qualcomm's Snapdragon 801 and 805 in a product. They received the part and associated driver software from QCOM as a final product

And thats where your idea of this business starts to unravel. Without the drivers, it could be that the Snapdragon does not violate any of those patents, any more than a bare Intel CPU violates the Amazon 1-click patent. And the same could be true for the software - without the hardware to run on, maybe it is not violating any patents (some would argue that this is, or should be, always true of all software). Generally, licensing or downloading of drivers is completely separate from purchasing of parts (this is not like retail PC peripherals, where the drivers come on a CD in the box). Only when Samsung puts them together in a product with certain features, does it start infringing.

Also, it is very common for patents to be the responsibility of the manufacturer of an end product, with "license included" variants of a component often being significantly more expensive than licensing the patents yourself if you are a big enough company to have the army of lawyers necessary to deal with the negotiations.

Its their last gasp in the mobile market. Their strategy has been to support their own SoC by not licensing their graphics core to anyone else, so now that they've failed to gain much traction for their ARM SoCs, they're left with nothing. If they'd focused on their core technology, they could have cleaned up by licensing their GPU cores to other manufacturers, so now some pointy haired type has come up with a scheme to make up for lost time by suing everyone who they've been refusing to license their technology to for the last 10 years.

There's improving the use of data across agencies in ways that improve efficiency and the service offered to the clients of those agencies, and then there's improving the use of data across agencies purely to violate privacy. Lets give them the benefit of the doubt here and assume that they're talking about the one of those that they don't already have covered.

Some of my best friends use Macs...

SIP is built in. Just go into the Phone app, open Settings, and under Call Settings there is an "Internet Call Settings" section where you can add accounts. Video and encryption may require third party options though.

It comes down to who is in control. When you send a parcel, you choose your own packaging. When you subscribe to internet service you generally don't get to choose what encapsulation your packets receive. Likewise with electricity.

Try a Japanese website - new invisible kana support.

Better looking fonts, my arse.

They are not interested because they do not understand what is happening. They ask the industry experts they have access to, and they will all give the telco side of the story. It needs someone to sit down with them over a beer and explain it in terms they can understand.

When the electricity company bills me, they bill me for the electricity metered at my premises, not for the overhead that is used by the grid. Why should Internet providers be any different? Yes, technically the ATM packets are coming into the premises, but they are part of the network overhead, not what is used by the customer.