The point is that they are using confusing and inconsistent terminology to report on the parameters of a scientific study. Using imprecise language muddies the results and makes them hard to reproduce, or even to draw a conclusion of your own.
>it is the few bad eggs you hear about that really do tarnish everyone
I don't think you know what the phrase "a few bad eggs" means. The actual phrase is "One bad apple spoils the bushel". It doesn't mean that if you remove the bad apple, the rest of the apples will be fine. It means corruption, left unchecked, will spread throughout all of the apples until the whole basket has to be discarded.
Prenda is a corrupt organization because the lawyers who make it up learned the behavior from somewhere else, and they in turn learned it from somewhere else. The only way to eliminate it is to remove all of the corruption, not just these bad lawyers. Severely punish those who seek to game the system. Better yet, fix the system that allowed and encouraged gaming to being with.
I think you are misinterpreting what I said. The media has a habit of misreporting scientific studies and the scientific community has a habit of falsifying data to get published. Therefore, when I hear a claim of a sudden breakthrough that is unbelievable, I...don't believe it. Or at least maintain a healthy skepticism. While these batteries may very well be exactly what the story claims, the real proof in the pudding will be if this ever makes it off paper, which it surely will if it's as amazing as the story makes it sound.
Virtually all of that magic has been incremental steps, not exponential leaps. Whenever I read a new report of a scientific breakthrough that is suddenly orders of magnitude beyond the level of what we have now, I'm skeptical of it. When there is an actual working product that is actually on the market (and not just promises that it will be there within 5 years), then I'll get excited about it. Until then, this is just another vaporware.
...Magic was discovered today and practical and affordable applications for it are now only 30 years away!
>It seems pointless to send humans to do something a machine can do better.
Because PR. People can relate to a human stepping foot on the Moon/Mars/Asteroid/etc. and get excited about it. Excited people will want to spend more money doing it. It's good for the whole program. Now, whether that is worth the extra expense is obvious up for debate, but you can't deny that there is a benefit to having a human go to these places.
His one-time payout should be a game of his choice from EA's portfolio or five dollars off of his next purchase of an EA game.
But ideally I'd like to cut the cord completely as the service is otherwise useless.
Fast and Furious wasn't enough to even make him break a sweat. Hell, Waco happened and Janet Reno skated. This won't even be a blip on the DOJ's radar.
If you don't know what it is, then you probably don't need to worry that it's been compromised. But if you absolutely must know, then it's literally the first page of hits on Google.
You won't need space defense for your asteroid claims. If this process is held up by international treaty, you can simply control it that way. Space travel (at least at this time) isn't Firefly. You don't just hop in a grungy cargo ship and go where ever you want. It will be trivially easy for anyone who cares to track a mining ship launch to its destination asteroid. Smuggling space ore will be virtually impossible. When the poached ore is returned to Earth, the people who mined it are held accountable by whatever legal methods are agreed upon by world governments, or not held accountable at all if space is deemed a "free for all".
You're shilling your own submissions in other threads? Classy.
Yeah, the dual profile feature sounds really nice. I wish more phones did that. It'll be interesting to see how well that works out and what kind of security holes will appear.
I didn't say it was complex and difficult for me. I said the software licensing and support were an expensive mess. I don't know where you got any of what you're accusing me of.