Raise your hand if you're shocked, simply shocked.

Honestly? I'm surprised they didn't have more than 150.

So nothing in there but beef? How does it all stick together?

Here is a video of a TV show Heston Blumenthal did in the UK, which demonstrated how you can make a burger using only chunks of sirloin and salt as the binding agent.

Looks pretty good to me!

How the hell does slashdot.org not support IPV6, I thought this was a tech website?

Forget IPV6 ... it doesn't have valid HTML, valid CSS and looks terrible on mobile devices.

Something along the lines of "Yes, the tracker says your Phone is here. No, it is not. Please call SPRINT at 1-800-xxx-xxxx" Lo-tech, but effective.

It's not a great picture, but he appears to have a sign next to his front door saying pretty much that.

... but wouldn't honking great images of snowflakes on the ground rushing towards you (and then underneath your car) not be rather distracting?

What is it about iPhones that keeps people buying them even when they have so many problems?

I hate to break it to you but they probably don't have those problems.

I've gone through a 3G, a 4, a 4S and now a 5 and I've not experienced any of the issues you describe. My friends don't have those problems either. On that basis, I don't think it's too unreasonable to suggest she's probably got a duff handset - it happens.

My advice is to install Google Maps onto her phone (yeah, we know Apple Maps is rubbish) and if she's still having problems with the 5 then take it back to an Apple store.

But it seems the best way to fight the iCrime Wave might be to slash the $699 price of an iPhone (unactivated), which costs an estimated $207 to make.

Only if you ignore such pesky things like R&D, salaries, buildings, administrative staff, operating costs, tooling costs, distribution, packaging, marketing and so on.

Apple make a good profit from their handsets, but not the three times that the submission implies. It's also worth noting that whilst the Nexus is impressively priced, the only Android OEM that is really making any money is Samsung - everyone else isn't doing quite so well.

Because the FSF doesn't support projects that integrate (or allow the integration of) proprietary bits and pieces. This includes firmwares that need to be loaded on a device prior to operation, so there's a fair amount of hardware with completely open drivers that don't work on Trisquel because they omitted the firmware.

Thanks for the explanation. Whilst it makes sense from an idealistic point of view, I can't help feeling that it's one of those great ideas that could ultimately do more bad than good - especially if the hardware someone uses doesn't work and the advice they find is "don't use that distribution, use this instead".

I suppose it comes down to goals: would the FSF rather someone stick with Windows if they are unable to use a FSF approved Linux distribution? Or is the goal to get people starting to move away from OSX and Windows, even if the first step is to what they consider an "imperfect" Linux distribution?

Why Trisquel?

Why not Linux Mint or Ubuntu or Debian or Redhat or one other distribution that is not only widely known, but has appropriate support, forums and users who can help?

I'm all for showing people what alternatives to Windows are out there, but surely it would be better to give them something else that - well - a decent number of people actually use?

The F in FRAND stands for fair, not free. They weren't FRAND licensed - reason being, Apple never licensed them. The question in dispute isn't the cost of the patents going forward, its punitive damage for not paying the FRAND cost upfront. If there's no punitive component to the cost, then there's no disincentive.

I never said it meant free, you must be confusing me with someone else.

Qualcomm and other chip suppliers already licence the patents, they then include that cost into the cost of the chip and pass the licence onto the buyer. They are allowed to do that.

As such, if Apple buy something from Qualcomm then they've already paid the FRAND licence indirectly to Samsung - no second payment to Samsung (and the hundreds of other companies who hold patents) is necessary as Qualcomm have already done the legwork. This is why Samsung don't have a leg to stand on.

(Disclaimer: I've bought chips from Qualcomm and the ease of handling all the various patent licences is part of their sales spiel)

While Samsung said it withdrew its claims in the interest of protecting consumer choice, it could have to do with a European antitrust investigation.

And that they are FRAND licenced, so they don't have a leg to stand on.

Oh and that they are under investigation in Korea for potentially abusing wireless Standards Essential Patents.

Plus the US Department of Justice is also looking at potential antitrust abuse by Samsung.

Not to mention that the FTC has made it clear that it won't tolerate the use of FRAND-encumbered Standards Essential Patents to block competitors in the US.

Nope, it was just about protecting "consumer choice" :)

Thanks, I now have.

Although, I still maintain that they should have stuck with "pulled the plug" as the original article stated - which isn't ambiguous and doesn't mean completely the opposite to everyone who doesn't have in depth knowledge about how one specific software package works.

Thanks for the clarification.

However I still don't understand why the original text which said "pulled the plugs" (and was understandable by everyone) was changed to something which is only understandable if you've ever used Git.

sfcrazy writes with news that Linus pulled a patch by Igno Molnar to remove support for the 386 from the kernel.

At first I thought I was going crazy. If Linux "pulled a patch by Igno" to remove 386 support, then that would mean that he prevented the patch going in. So why does he add "Good riddance" at the bottom?

So then I read the second link and it actually says:

Linus Torvalds, the father of Linux kernel, (actually Ingo Molnar) has pulled the plugs on Intel's 386 processors.

I've been here a while and this is the first time I can remember that I've seen a story on Slashdot state the complete opposite of what actually happened. Geeeeesh.