Could this be in any way related to the strobing effects (and afterimages / discrete tracers) of LSD and other psychedelics?

(see also http://psychedelic-information-theory.com/The-Control-Interr... - not sure how much of it is just pseudoscience nonsense though)

You're kidding right? https://i.imgur.com/GapKBh1.png And I know from experience living in that area that Google Maps is lacking a great many of the local kebab shops.

I've tried a few of these and they don't do kebabs. I think the word designates different foods to different people.

My understanding is that "Kebab" as such simply means "meat". In continental Europe, "Kebab" is often short for "Döner Kebab" (meat sliced off a central rotating skewer in thin shavings), while in the US, it seems to usually stand for "Shish Kebab", (skewers of meat cubes served on a plate either with or without the skewers).

Thank you very much. From what I'm used to, kebab would be a doner kebab in a wrap/sandwich. There are very few places doing that in London.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doner_kebab

"generally absolutely ridiculous"

Did you look at the map? It's nearly all things with a place name in the product name. For example, "Welsh Beef". Why is it reasonable for a consumer to buy Welsh Beef and for it to possibly have come from somewhere other than Wales?

It seems to me, more like generalising the concept of trademarks to place names rather than just company names and brand name.

Am I just misremembering, or was there a time where the only way to register a .je was direct through island networks? I used to live there, and recall the domains always being a bit of a pain.

You're correct and they're a proper tinpot organisation. Only other one I could find was gandi.net. £80 per year is horrendous too...

Isn't this more of an argument that we shouldn't necessarily treat everything we observe, rather than that we should observe less?

I get that screening may not be worth the cost, but if the screening is effectively free... then it seems the problem is more in how we respond to the answers.

The ethical argument is that failure to detect a life threatening condition in 100 people is not the same evil as causing a life threatening condition in 1.

What it boils down to is the rate of false positives versus the rate of undetected positives (as opposed to false negatives). If, for example, the Apple Watch in use by 1000 people detects 3 people who with a-fib who previously were not aware of their condition, we might say, "excellent!" But on the other hand if it turns out that one of those people didn't have a-fib, was put on medication and suffered complications, we now have 1 person needlessly suffering who wouldn't have been suffering before and 2 people who are in no better or worse shape than they would otherwise have been. If the regular detection rate of a-fib leads to about 1 person in 1000 being granted an improved quality of life, has the a-fib detection program been useful or harmful?

Then it gets worse: what if the test we use to "diagnose" a condition have a high false positive rate? One example is screening for lung cancer: the screen itself has a 35% false positive rate, but the condition has a 2.1% fatality rate in the population. If you don't screen at all, 21 people in 1000 will die from lung cancer. If you screen, you end up saving about 10% of the people with lung cancer (about 3 out of that group of 21). But the screening means over 350 people end up being told they have lung cancer when they don't, 25 people end up being subject to an invasive procedure to diagnose the condition, and 3 (otherwise healthy but falsely diagnosed) people develop a major complication as a result of the invasive procedure.

Is all that harm done worth saving three lives?

The above is illustrated in this paper about lung cancer screening: https://t.co/YlbZIraekL

In the UK, debit cards can chargeback. While this is currently implemented over MasterCard/Visa network, it's the bank that performs it and there's no reason to expect that would change if something replaced the plastic.

Something similar (but not quite identical) exists for direct debits called the direct debit guarantee.

Although the vast majority of major airports are state owned, some aren't. Notably, most major airports in the UK (including Heathrow and Gatwick) are privately owned and operated.

I don't think T-Pain is trying to sneak autotune past anyone...

Is there any reason why these devices can't have a USB-C connector on one side, and a USB-A connector on the other? Being able to keep just one single token around and knowing I can always use it without an adaptor is the holy grail of these devices for me.

Cost. That's really the only reason.

This would be a really good stop gap until the industry has transitioned everyone over to usb-c.

>>> the cost of getting by — long ago went past insane (£17,040: the cost per year of educating a four year-old child at Thomas’s school in Fulham, not including uniform).

Note that this is only if you send your child to private school, not merely "getting by". Even among the middle classes, this is not very common, especially at four years old. The nicer parts of London have some of the best state schools in the country.

Spot on, and looking at the last paragraph: > Whisper it: 2018 will be the year smug Londoners finally stopped boring on about basement and loft conversions at smart dinner parties Sounds like someone who just against rich rather providing facts. The article seems to target the expensive areas in negatively emotional approach.

'The nicer parts of London have some of the best state schools in the country.'

Which, ironically, is a major driver in the rising cost of housing in these areas.