If you want to be able to write practically anything on mobile, including ≠, ≈, ‰, ℝ etc., have a look at Unexpected keyboard. No spellcheck or autocomplete, though.

This seems like a great source, thanks a lot for posting it.

I didn’t read the original paper yet, perhaps it’s there, but it isn’t in the linked article nor its source Ars Technica article. Can authors themselves upload their papers to these archives, and if so, how to do it correctly to make it findable both by DOI and other means? Does anyone know?

I see. You can open just about anything, something like 18 formats, it’s on their website. I prefer epub, but it can open Kindle’s mobi etc. That’s why I bought it, I got a large library of pdbs.

I have Touch HD 3, I had some Touch Lux before. I had it for a while, don’t know their newest models. But yes, not only would I buy it again, I already did, just bought a newer version. Unless I was looking for something for hand note taking, I wouldn’t change. What I dislike is that when you break the screen, it’s expensive to replace, so I just bought a new one instead. Nothing you wouldn’t be used to from phones. And I’d very much like to have an option to disable the touch layer of the screen by long press of one of the physical buttons, but it’s a minor issue. What I like is the tunable intensity and colour temperature of the light and I’m quite happy with everything else. You can upload books by sending them as an attachment to a special email. If you don’t like the interface for reading the books, you can even quite easily replace it with Cool reader. I tried it before, but I didn’t do it in the newest one. You can use dictionaries, some are preinstalled, or use notes and highlights, but I don’t have experience with that.

I agree with the other reply that pdfs are terrible for e-readers. That being said, Pocketbooks can open them (which is not that common) and it is possible to read them, although it isn’t so comfortable, especially for A4 pdfs. It can also open wide range of other formats and I’m quite happy with it in general. You can connect it to a computer and simply copy your books there, among other means of getting books there. But I have to say I have no first hand experience with competition.

deleted by creator

Wow, thank you, this is a great source! So less than 90% of the income is used to run the companies and do all the R&D. Honestly, that’s less than I thought and shows how greedy they are. If I read it right, they are more profitable than other large companies. Wow. So a state-owned non-profit pharma company could in theory produce new medicine 10 % cheaper and still be fine. Provided that state-owned company could be as efficient as a private one…

You don’t need profit in the sense of making lots of extra money compared to how much money you actually put in. I would be very interested in how much net profit is compared to gross in relative numbers. It’s a lot in absolute numbers, but I suspect not so much in relative. The problem why drug development is so very expensive is that you don’t just pay large sums for the drugs that are developed, but also for all those that are not, because they prove not useful during the testing. And there is way, way more than the successful ones, perhaps 100 to 1? I don’t have numers at hand. So in the end, you have to charge a lot of extra money above the production cost if you want to have enough money to develop any drugs at all.

Of course, that isn’t true for old drugs. Which is a reason why generics are so much cheaper. And also why patents need to exist.

I’m sure pharma companies abuse the system as much as they can, but not as much as it might appear at a first glance.

A state doesn’t have this kind of money to burn. If they did it, the money would have to come from somewhere. So either you increase taxes, decrease spending elsewhere, or start a business making a lot of money. Such as, say, selling the newly developed medications at a markup… It’s sad, but I’m not aware of a better way.

That being said, the cost of medications in the US is utterly ridiculous.

In a considerable part of the world. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_driving_ages

Thanks for this, those are some incredible designs!

Well, it wouldn’t be good evidence on its own at court, but can very well nudge an investigation in a right direction. And anyway, it’s a first step, done with little resources and ablimited dataset for training. And at least for me, it’sbthe first time I hear something like this is possible at all. Others said that tools to the same effect were around for quite a while, but I haven’t seen anyone providing sources, especially some that would give quantification of its capabilites.

Have you read the link? It doesn’t say thay that analysing figerprints is less powerfull than was known, but more. It describes previously unknown connection between fingerprints of different fingers of a single person. This could indicate, for example, that two crimes were probably commited by the same person even when not a single identical fingerprint was found on both sites.

This doesn’t sound very accurate. For starters, classical mechanics fails to describe even motion of Mercury. But more importantly, uncertainty in this context means someting else in this context. And while it is true that Schrödinger’s cat is both alive and dead until observed, once observed, it’s been dead or alive all along. Same with a tree, once it is determined it has fallen, it has already made the sound and produced all the consequences some time ago. While I don’t understand quantum mechanics, I’m fairly sure the person who wrote the copypasta understands it even less than me.

Not quite what you want, but Privacy redirect can at least send you to Teddit or Libreddit instead.