You mean like the Gamecube was called "dolphin" before it was released? Or the Kinect was called "Project Natal"?

My calculations for GBP -> USD were a bit off, it seems that £25 is closer to $40, but that is still $120/month just on test strips.

The guy in question paid $450 for 3 months health insurance, or $150 a month (less than the $197.15 you suggested).

WRT the $70/mo, the supplies listed are inadequate for a months supply for a type 1 diabetic.

1. 3 glucose test strips a day is insufficient. Maintaining decent control usually requires testing at least 5 times a day - on waking, before each meal and before bed
2. Each glucose test should be done with a sterile lancet - so 150 of those a month
3. Most type 1 diabetics are on between 3 and 5 injections a day, which requires between 3 and 5 new needles or syringes a day, or 120 a month

Buying diabetes supplies is expensive. They may not cost much to produce, but 50 test strips costs about £25 in the UK over-the-counter (or $1 per strip). At 5 tests a day, thats $150/month just for test strips. I've not had to buy any other diabetes supplies myself, so I am unsure of just how much they cost.

I'm not sure having 3 possible preset speeds, where you able to select one of them arbitrarily and engage the cruise control to have your vehicle automatically accelerate or decelerate to that speed is sensible. For example, driving on the motorway and engaging the "I'm outside school" mode (or the opposite) would cause serious accidents.
A better system may be allowing the cruise control at any speed, and if you are within 3 mph of one of the "target" speeds it automatically adjusts to that speed (along with a "no, don't autocorrect" switch).

The limit may not be appropriate, but I would be very surprised if more than about 10% of drivers could accurately assess the appropriate maximum and minimum speeds for any stretch of road, and the vast majority of drivers would reckon that they would be within those 10%.

I wouldn't trust most people to set their own limits, as they don't have a clue what their (or their vehicles) capabilities are.

Surely thats the same speedo you use to tell what speed you are doing when cruise control isn't enabled?

trillion

There are different boards for different regions of the world, to allow for decent timezone coverage; Americas, EMEA and Austrilasia.

I believe that the people who make up the membership boards are appointed by the Ubuntu Community Council.

The members of the Ubuntu CC are appointed by Mark Shuttleworth, and "confirmed" by a vote by people that currently hold "Ubuntu Member" status.

"Intel® Professional Edition Compilers include advanced optimization features, multithreading capabilities, and support for Intel® processors and compatible processors. They also provide highly optimized performance libraries for creating multithreaded applications."

Taken directly from http://software.intel.com/en-us/intel-compilers/.

The difference is MS would be saying "We don't support OS X", and actively enforcing it. Intel are saying that their compiler does work for AMD processors, without any mention of the fact that they put time and money into actively making it worse for AMD processors (instead of just not doing anything to improve performance specifically for them)

There is a difference between not optimising for a competitors processor and deliberately making performance worse for a competitors processor.

You found it down "for a few minutes at least twice", over how many years? Just because financial systems would suffer insane losses if they had that kind of downtime it doesn't mean that it can't happen - within the last couple of weeks the London Stock Exchange was suspended for several hours due to technical problems. Even if you find Google down for a few minutes once a month, it is still doing better than the LSE this year.

The "old, dirty and cheap" effect is actually a fairly accurate representation of what it looks / feels like to live and work in Slough, where the UK version of the office is based.

It only "lasted" 2 seasons because the writers felt they would just be redoing the same thing over again if they did any more, instead of milking it for another 20 seasons until everyone got fed up with it. Instead of running the series in to the ground, they stopped while the idea was still funny.

There is a bit of a difference between the scenario you describe and what happened here. The issue here was that a question was published in a public document, detailing a question asked by an MP which was due to be answered later this week by someone else in Parliament. The Guardian obviously wanted to report on this question, and the company involved didn't want the bad press and so tried to get a court order against the newspaper highlighting the question on the grounds that it would be libellous. The information is (by law) freely available to the public, and noone was prevented from looking at the question, the newspaper just wasn't allowed to draw attention to it. There is no expectation of privacy in Parliament - what goes on is *expected* to be public, which is different from court cases involving children, where they often can't (and don't) name the children involved.

I really would recommend joining a site like Diabetes Daily. I have been there since about a week after I was diagnosed, and the opportunity to discuss problems I was having with other diabetics has proved invaluable. As I said before, you have to apply some common sense to some of the advice given there, but being able to have a conversation with somone who actually understands what going high/low actually feels like and may have experienced similar problems to you is very beneficial.