Slashdot Mirror

Apple has already sued an major Australian grocery store/supermarket using an 'apple' in it's name - which looked nothing like the apple bite logo.
http://www.woolworths.com.au/

Well Kindle is getting around. I was in my local Woolworths today and there were posters up telling me I could buy a Kindle like it was the most natural thing to buy while checking out. http://woolworths.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/Website/Woolworths/About%20Us/Woolworths-News/Kindle%20e-reader

Totally agree. Further proof: no only did Woolworth's get away with stealing Apple's logo, they even stole their own name!

I'm an Australian, and I eat apples. In fact, I regularly by apples from woolworths.

It's not that I'm lazy, I just find going to the supermarket a frustrating, inefficient and depressing experience. Perhaps the original idea was just ahead of it's time?

What I think would work is for one of the large supermarket chains (e.g. Coles or Woolworths in australia or whatever it is in your part of the world) to get into online sales.

Woolworths Australia has been using fingerprint scanners for signing in and out of work for at least seven years. I used to work in one of their stores in 1997.
The fingerprint was only used for verification, not identification (you had to enter your employee-id first). The system was easily cheated though: it was possible to use ANY finger to idenitfy yourself, not just the one that was initially scanned, you only had to press it hard enough onto the scanner.
Last time I checked, they were still using the same system. 0x2a

The Internet's greatest impact has been on the the voice it gives the public. Business is just using it as a tool, people use it to invoke change in the systems that regulate their lives.

That's pretty arguable. I mean, name one major social change that has happened as a result of the Internet. Sure, we're communicating faster, but has it actually provided a clear social change?

And why isn't faster communications a clear social change? Would you have cried out "name one major social change as a result of telephones!" if you were around in the early 1900s?

These days I can bank online, buy food online, pay rent online, communicate in almost-real-time with overseas relatives, find communities in my local area with similar hobbies/interests, or buy and sell things with people I've never met. How is this anything other than a social change?

Government services are increasingly online. The government is nothing more than the organised administrators of society. If the Internet is helping the government then it is directly helping society as well.

Linux is built by online communities that wouldn't exist without the Internet, and Linux is definitely helping poorer countries that wouldn't have had any options without free software. This is leading to real social changes by giving poor schools access to "expensive" software.

The physically disabled can work from home. Poorer countries with intelligent citizens can now compete directly with foreign superpowers.

The Internet is to the 21st century what the phone was to the 20th century. Initially only in the hands of the rich, then in the hands of the middle class, then in the hands of everybody and taken for granted. Sure, most of the improvements are evolutionary instead of revolutionary. The Internet has improved existing practises: there are Internet equivalents for postal mail, telephones, television, radio, and community halls. But isn't this enough? Isn't a gradual improvement enough to be called a "clear social change"? I say it is.