|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 07:56 PM EDT |
The flip side: The lawyers at this level are much better communicators than
random university profs.
MSS2[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 12 2012 @ 12:06 AM EDT |
Yeah, sorry, I don't share your worries. Looking at the report, and
having
done some assembly programming in college in the 70s, I think Google
is doing a
very good job of clearly showing why Dalvik does what it does
differently than
the jvm. From my limited experience on a couple of jurys, I
believe two things:
jury members do work hard to focus on understanding the
testimony and the law
as the Judge instructs, and the testimony that is clearest
and
most sensible
gets more credibility. Questions which bring forth clarity are far
more
effective than questions which hinge on nitpicking. The common
perception
is that
good lawyering is about making things confusing and it's the exact
opposite.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Gringo_ on Saturday, May 12 2012 @ 12:56 AM EDT |
| ...and I bet you are not succeeding. Neither am I. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 13 2012 @ 04:51 AM EDT |
I'm now trying to imagine taking a bunch of completely random
people off the
street who probably have no interest in or aptitude for the
subject...
Not quite "completely random people off the street...",
more "random people off the street selected for knowing nothing in the
subject..."[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 14 2012 @ 03:35 PM EDT |
| There are bound to be patents on esoteric aspects of quantum computers. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
