Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Nice conspiracy theory, but... (Score 1) 514 514

You seriously believe a company like Apple cannot ramp up production if there is demand?

Learn the concept of marginal returns. I am quite certain Apple could buy up more production capacity. I am equally certain it could not do so in an economically viable way. Not all demand is profitable. The other makers are equally constrained, which is why none of them can produce a viable tablet to compete on price with iPad.

Comment: Re:Peer review is broken (Score 1) 962 962

But then they "prove" that it doesn't.

No, they showed that it is less effective at primary prevention the previously supposed, (but still very effective at secondary prevention).

The trick is to develop the hypothesis properly. Also, there is a lot more to "proving" than a null hypothesis - that is just a useful logical device, especially when using statisitcal significance as a metric (as well as helping to check that the hypothesis is amenable to falsification).

And the statins I take are generic and long out of patent, so "big pharma" is way past caring about them.

Real science is hard and takes time. What is taught in a few paragraphs today took Newton a lifetime to perceive.

Comment: Re:Peer review is broken (Score 1) 962 962

Things are getting more difficult to prove.

Only if you use the mathematical definition of proof, which science does not.

"Proof" in science, is more-or-less synonymous with "test". As in proving grounds, proof-spirit, the exception that proves (ie tests the limit of) the rule...

Comment: Re:Generic Trademarks (Score 2) 356 356

However, when you say the word "App Store", I think that conjures up images of just about any sort of app stores that we have nowadays - Palm's, Blackberry's, Windows Phone's Android's, etc

That is rather Apple's point: the others are living off the goodwill created by Apple's innovation ("passing off", in the parlance). ie, Apple's argument is that it has become generic because others lifted it. And I believe US trademark law operates on a "use it or lose it" principle that requires trademarks to be defended actively.

Also, I would bet a reasonable amount of cash that if you did a survey of non-geek smartphone users, most would think "iPhone" to the prompt "App store".

A fail-safe circuit will destroy others. -- Klipstein

Working...