Problem with this paper is that they seem to be treating notations like B(b,λ) as individual results which are influenced by random factors, whereas in any inequality where Bell allows for the possibility of randomness (i.e. the outcome is not totally determined by the detector setting b and the hidden variables λ), the terms in his inequalities are always supposed to represent probabilities or expectation values. Though it might be true on an individual pair of trials that B(ab,λ) (i.e. the result at detector B when this detector uses setting b, and detector A uses setting a, and hidden variables take some specific value λ) is different from B(a'b,λ) (where the only difference is that detector A uses setting a'), the expectation values over a large number of trials should not be any different, assuming the choice of detector setting at A cannot have any causal influence on the results at B, and assuming the choice of settings for detector A is random rather than being causally influenced by some other factor c that can also causally influence the result at B.