Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
SAMSUNG PLANS TO issue a software update for its recalled Galaxy Note 7 smartphones that will limit battery recharges to 60%, and prevent them from overheating.
The front page of the Seoul Shinmun, a South Korean newspaper, carried a Samsung advertisement on Tuesday announcing the software update for any users of the Note 7 who may be disregarding its recall notice and continuing to use the smartphone.
“It is a measure to put consumer safety first but we apologize for causing inconvenience,” the advertisement by Samsung said. The update for South Korean users will start 20 Sept, it said.
South Korean media earlier reported the software update plan, citing Samsung.
It was not clear when the update may be issued overseas. Also unclear was whether it would be forced on existing Note 7 phones regardless of user consent. Yonhap News Agency reported that Samsung is in talks with mobile carriers to deliver the same update to keep battery power at 60% or below at all times.
From bad to worse
The planned update is the latest action Samsung has taken as it deals with faulty batteries in certain Note 7 devices. Numerous reports of the Note 7′s batteries exploding and catching fire have surfaced, including one incident which saw a six-year-old end up with burns to his body after using it.
Concerns were so great that a number of aviation companies told passengers not to charge or turn on their Note 7 while flying.
Samsung recalled 2.5 million of the devices just two weeks after their launch, saying the problem stems from a manufacturing glitch in the batteries.
The company did not say how many more battery fires in the Note 7 have been reported since 1 Sept when 35 cases were confirmed. In announcing its recall, the Canadian government said one case was confirmed in Canada while Samsung received more than 70 reported cases in the United States alone.
The US Consumer Product Safety Commission is considering an official product recall.
Samsung is the world’s largest smartphone maker, and analysts said the recall might leave a larger impact on its brand than earlier estimated. The problem saw it lose $26 billion (€23.13 billion) in value despite strong sales with the S7 and S7 Edge this year.
The company has urged consumers to immediately turn off the phones and get them replaced with the new Note 7. It has also started marking safe Note 7 devices with a blue ‘S’ so consumers know it’s not hazardous.
But implementing such a large-scale recall is a challenge. Consumers have to visit Samsung service centers or retailers twice – once to get a replacement phone – not a Galaxy Note 7 – and have a safety check of their existing Note 7, and a second time to get a new Note 7.
The exchange of Note 7 devices for Irish customers will begin from 19 September.
(Additional reporting by Quinton O’Reilly)
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Am I reading this right? If a woman was raped she can’t have an abortion? After enduring such an experience and wants a abortion still has to travel to the UK?
or if she cant afford it risk ordering pills off the internet and get a longer prison sentance than her rapist if she gets caught
That’s exactly the situation in ireland, and groups like youth defense think allowing an abortion in such a situation is wrong.
Sure why would they care about a women who’s been brutally raped?
Why so surprised Conor? This has always been the case in Ireland and this legislation was never going to change this. We need political parties to commit to a referendum on these issues.
Welcome to Ireland 2013 where women are shipped off too Britain in their thousands so we can pretend abortion doesn’t happen in the country.
Utterly ridiculous and incredibly unfair. These politicians are not listening to the majority of the irish population who would be in favour of supporting such women. stubborn, small-minded, useless, cold-hearted,bible-bashing, looking-out-for-themselves fools!our constitution is out of date! Dont dismiss common sense in favour of an out of date document!
Oh no the looney’s have won. Could all the Christians and Muslims have the decency just to leave all us rational thinking people alone. You’ve had your day in the sun and you f’ed it all up
This is the die hard prochoicers fault for trying to railroad abortion on demand into Ireland on the back of poor sativas death, instead of having proper legislation put forward through a referendum. Even prolife people think it’s f#cked up that a women should have to carry a child that wont live.
Put yourselves on the back. This is all your fault.
@Mr Jingles – her name was SAVITA, is it so hard for you to give her some respect by spelling her name correctly?
Mr jingles
Should I address you by the name you hide behind? Na whatever. You are without a doubt the saddest individual ive ever heard. I hope you never have a child raped. You sir are a class 1 idiot.
Sorry my mistake its not a common name and just because I spelt it wrong doesnt mean I dont have any respect. Another example of the prochoicers pulling at emotions to futher their cause. Have a bit of repect yourself. Makes me sick!
Further
It’s a bloody disgrace.
It’s times like these you wish you were born in Egypt, at least they have the balls to kick out their government!
Shame on you.
*spelled
Leslie you’re unemplyed and I’m an engineer, who’s the idiot?
Rational John? If your so keen on abortion why dont you become a doctor and perform one, just a matter of slicing an unborn child to peices and throwing whats left into a bin. Your lucky to be alive unlike the countless others in this world with no protection in the womb.
Martin what a sick vile comment.
The child is protected in this country no matter how it is conceived because it had the same right to life as you or I. There are other options like adoption. Murder is the most obscene of all the options available.
Ferg, have you said that to many rape victims recently? People like you are dirt.
I don’t think an abortion should be ok if the conception was a mistake between parents or the girl changes her mind or whatever circumstance like that may arise, but if the unborn child has no chance for survival, and is putting the mothers life at risk, or the mother was raped, it’s a no brainer! How can people be so narrow minded… I’d love to find out I’m the result of a rape! Lets boost the suicide rates in the country too!!!
Was my friend was. Engineer. Any one can be an engineer. All ye have to do is use a monkey wrench
Itd not your body michael so its not your choice
I know it’s not my body, but it could be my sisters or my daughters and sure as shit if they were stupid enough to consensually conceive a child by mistake or change their mind after months of pregnancy I’d say man the hell up you made your choice! The child has every right for a shot at life! It’s the child’s body too! But when it’s a horrible or unfortunate circumstance like rape or development defect of course the choice should be there. There was a story in the journal today of a mother throwing a baby out an apartment block window in china that was run over in a car. The mother had a choice for abortion in china. I’m not pro life or pro choice! I’m pro circumstance and each one can be different!
Good points. But in what you say at the end, circumstances. ..then should that be the womans choice so?
Many people I have talked to believe that even if a girl is raped should go through with the pregnancy. I was disugusted at this. They told me they could put the chip up for adoption. I then asked them if in 18 years the child wanted to see it’s birth mother. I was annoyed and disgusted at some of my friends about this
Michael, you do know that contraception and emergency contraception fails sometimes don’t you? It doesn’t mean anyone is stupid I’d hate to be your sister or daughter since they couldn’t rely on your support in such a circumstance. 90% of abortions take place before 13 weeks and an embryo is not a child, it’s not sentient in anyway, the brain development simply isn’t there. Since you think its the ‘child’s’ body too then why are you ok with it being aborted if it’s Father was a rapist? You can’t have it both ways.
You think your daughter’s future should be ruined because a split condom? And what about the guy who got her pregnant, is he stupid too? An early abortion is like a heavy period, it’s not a person. I’m very glad I have a supportive Father who would put me first.
What you think is irrelevant anyway as it would be their body and choice, not yours or would you imprison them until the birth? Disapproval is all you would have.
Yeah, leslie the difference is your grass engineers friends (lawn more men) and a proper engineer is a vastly different degree of a comfortable life. Speak soon after I go to test drive me little Z4
And to say anyone can be a engineer makes me f#cking sick, it’s not like doing a youth supervisor scheme that ANYONE can do . Your silly lazy liberal buzz of “everything should be handed to on a plate” makes me fear for the next generation.
Why so harsh on Mr Jingles? Aren’t you violently [very] agreeing with each other?
The insults coming from jingles are shocking but typical.
Circumstance is not really a choice although i wouldnt say you could deny fully the choice of the mother of course they have a large part to play in the decision making, Im thinking from the perspective of young girls having sex with multiple partners at parties etc. That get drunk, get pregnant etc, there should be enforcement in place that the mother and father own up to their responsibilities. If this was not the case, wouldnt everyone in this situation just abuse the system? The alternative you might say is that they have the child and live off the handouts from the government affecting tax etc. ITs not easy to determine what a right and a wrong circumstance is, but it shouldnt be, at the end of the day it is a life that is being affected.
And Kelly, you say “Since you think its the ‘child’s’ body too then why are you ok with it being aborted if it’s Father was a rapist? You can’t have it both ways.” Of course you can, there is a big difference between a drunken mistake and a rape. Did you not read what i posted about circumstance and each one being different?
You make some very good points Michael, I just wonder and a young couple being forced to have the child, what hope is there for that child if firstly they didn’t want it, and secondly weren’t equipped to rear it properly?
That’s very true martina, but is that reason for abortion? I wouldn’t think so, adoption is always an option.
In an ideal world the baby would be given for adoption but I think (not having been in this position, thank God) that people would find it harder to hand over a baby. I just worry about the welfare of a child being brought up by parents that may resent it and not look after it properly. It’s a very sad situation from all sides…
Welcome to Ireland. Please turn your clocks back to local time, the 19th century.
19th century? Your getting ahead of yourself. We’re still in the dark ages. What we need is a renaissance.
Just wondering if a 12 year old girl was raped by her father and became pregnant with a non viable fetus, would the pro lifers force her to go full term. Frightening to thing how sick and depraved people can be in the name of ” MORALITY “……
Richie, they absolutely would, the foetus is more important to them than any born child.
Religious zealots and fascists seek to control and to impose inhumane limits on individual freedom.
Although it is gratuitously hurtful, victims of rape and incest will travel to the UK and elsewhere where they wil receive the mercy and compassion unavailable in Ireland.
I have been admonished, even by pro-choice supporters, for contending that religious zealotry and fascism contributed to Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution. Apparently political correctness requires that pro choice supporters must accept that pro-life advocate are merely misguided. This is so even though it is the pro-life lobby seek to dictate the freedom of women by force of law.
I am of the opposite view. Pro-life seek to impose their authoritarianism and religious dogma inspired views on others because they are fascist members of a fascist organisation, the Roman Catholic Church.
How many members of Catholic Comment, Youth Defence, the Iona Institute, the Life Instiitute and the platform groups are non Catholic?
Hard to disagree with you Tony. Hopefully this is just the start of dismantling that disaster of an article.
Praise jebus!
Completely agree with you Tony. They hope it will all go away now, well there are many, many of us who won’t ever stop until we get a referendum to remove the vile Article 40.3.3.
Stupidity!!! It’s just gonna cause more arguments after this bill is passed.
Why not just let people make up their own mind, I can’t understand how and why a politician has the power to influence something that has F all to do with them!!!. It’s not their body, it’s not their life.
Seems to me those on the pro life side of the debate can pack up their rosaries and head home with a sense of a job well done. With no exceptions for inevitable miscarriage, fatal foetal abnormalities, rape, incest and an unworkable term date, nothing has changed and it was all a tremendous waste of time. All that seems to have been achieved is the criminalisation of women wanting abortions, and yet another layer to the wall of the irish “dont ask, dont tell” least we have the UK as a carpet to shove our problems under. As for our shoddy democracy…well was that ever news?
The problem is not the legislation but the constitution. Until Article 40.3.3 is removed we won’t be able to add in provisions like this. For all the talk on both sides about this all this legislation is doing is simply codifying and putting rules around what the Supreme Court said 20 years ago. This was all it was ever going to be.
And given how vitrolic and nasty this debate was does anybody think we are going to look at Article 40.3.3 in the short term. Not a hope.
This whole thing is now a complete joke
This whole debate is a fricking joke!!
Remember the names of those who voted against this. When they come to the door…looking for the vote next time. Chase them up the street with your anger. Tell them to take their catholic church ethos and fcuk off.
And just when I thought I was getting an ounce of respect for kenny…….its gone. He never changed from bring a spinless useless parish pumper
I’d say you’ve been parish pumped before Lesley
In a shed in Kildare. Baaaaaahhhhh
With both yer oul ones…get up the yard
Lesley…. King of Kildare/altar boy/wannabe culchie
Does anyone value this clowns opinion?
I value it. Value it like haveing a steamy shite. Man u are shite bags les.
What a backward country, I’d be ashamed to be Irish right now
As one of the proudest Irishmen around, I can say I am.
This is so messed up, it must be a smoke screen for something really big that the Government is trying to slip by us unnoticed ……..
Did you not read about the 100% cut in wages then and the introduction of a tax of tin foil hats.
@ Rhiannon, much as I hate to agree with your assessment, it is absolutely correct in the short term.
In the longer term, there is widespread awareness that the real problem is Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution and that we will remain cursed by this piece of religious fundamentalism until that Article is repealed by a Referendum of the people. It should never have been introduced and thirty years or more later, it is time to repeal this terrible Article.
I never thought I’d see the day that I would agree with J. Higgins & R. Boyd Barret.
@ Patrick, I know what you mean!
Normally find them a bit eye-rolly, but they were dead on about the impossible situation survivors find themselves in. How the hell is a girl like X, sexually abused at the age of 13, going to be able to afford to travel to England?
absolutely disgraceful.
The sad reality is that adding this in could never have been on the agenda because if it had been included the most likely outcome is that it would have be challenged and struck down in the Supreme Court as unconstitutional therfore taking the entire piece of legislation out. This is the same reason that the suicide clause could not be taken out of the bill because attempting to narrow the law would have been equally open to challenge.
The bill is driven by the Supreme Court judgement in the X case and is legislating for that judgement and nothing more. I wish the situation were different but until Article 40.3.3 is removed we are stuck with the situation.
Where can I see a list of the TDs who voted against this motion so I can be sure never to vote for them again?
I thought there was a record on the Oireachtas website of votes but I had a quick look and couldn’t find anything. That’s not to say that it isn’t there.
Hmm, I’ll have to keep an eye on it. They won’t be getting my vote in the next election anyhow. How dare they reject this clause, the one opportunity to actually change something.
They didn’t have a choice Anon. Don’t get me wrong. I’d like to see this provision included but the reality is that adding it in would most likely make the law unconstitutional because of Article 40.3.3 because appaling and disgusting as rape and incest are they do not directly threaten the life of the mother which is the nub of what Article 40.3.3 is all about.
If we want real change we have to remove Article 40.3.3 first. But that is really unlikely to happen in the short term. After this debate I think most politicians aren’t going to want to touch this issue for a long while.
Sad but true, to have access to abortion for rape survivors and fatal foetal abnormality Article 40.3.3 has to be repealed by referendum which the politicos will try to avoid doing as long as possible. We will just keep the pressure on, this is nowhere near the end.
It sickens me. Is there any way the public can call for a referendum? I really hope abortion will be legal in my lifetime. I don’t my children growing up in a country where they don’t have a choice.
Are the government just making a hulabaloo so they look like they’re doing something but in actual fact they’re doin f¥{£ all? Surprised much? Nope!
It would have been struck down as unconstitutional. The constitution (and as discussed, established in X case) allows for abortion where the life of the mother is at risk (has equal regard for the lives of both). So really there is no way that rape and incest can be included in this bill – it’d need for the constitution to be changed. I’m not arguing the merits either way of the inclusion of either, I’m just stating that a referendum would be the only appropriate course of action to make it law.
This should be put to a referendum and only the women of Ireland should vote! Each and every woman should be in control of there body, mind and soul! Any woman who has become pregnant due to rape or incest or who’s life is in anyway threatened should surely be offered abortion as a choice. Any woman who has a medical history physically or mentally then surely the team already involved in her care needs/plan should help and support those woman who want to have an abortion upto, during and after the procedure!
I agree with your point that everyone should be offered by a choice, but you set a dangerous precedent campaigning for only some of the population to be allowed to vote on constitutional amendments.
What’s next we change the constitution to allow TDs to shoot people on site, but as it is only them who get to decide to pull the trigger then only they get a vote?
no wonder with r**ist creeps like TD Tom Barry , in our government making decisions for Women!
what RBB holding up there
have your say