View it like this: if there is a significant discrepancy between voting trends in paper-ballot w/ audit counties, and those that decided not to opt-in, those counties may have an angry electorate on their hands that would demand an explanation.
If they can't offer a suitable explanation due to a lack of a paper trail because they decided not to accept free money from the feds... well, I am not going to say they *would* be in trouble because the American Electorate is notorious for not caring, but there would at least be some eyebrows raised.
Oh, and my Zen works well with EMI's stuff on iTunes.
Or are you implying that somehow, Apple should be offering all its music DRM-free against the wishes of the copyright holders? Because at this point, it's no longer Apple that wants the DRM on that music... (Video is another matter: Hey Steve! How about you use your weight on Disney's board to remove the DRM from the Disney movies you sell on iTunes Store?)
You're blaming this on Apple fanboys? Seriously? Until the MacBook started with glossy, the *only* laptops I had seen with glossy were PCs. Maybe I just missed out on a huge part of apple history, but did any Mac before the MacBook even come with glossy?
If any company is responsible for glossy, it's not Apple. They didn't even offer glossy on the MBP until after the MB came out.
Oh, and after searching to figure out what you were talking about with Intel and the 80486, I found out that it was INTEL that was not allowed to use it because someone else had the trademark on the 80___ prefix. So while Intel did lose, and had to name their processor "i486", thats because someone else already had the trademark that prevented them from calling it "80486"! Interesting how you mistook the facts in a case you yourself brought up...
Copyright != trademark. Come back when you know the issue at hand, and can make rational, intelligent conversation instead of making blind comments about complete nonsequitors.
I agree. The counterclaim should be exactly as effective. They both should be given equal weight by the trademark arbiter, and a decision made based on the merits of each of their cases. I could easily see them deciding that the uses were different enough to grant NYC's trademark. I can also understand Apple having qualms about other companies using apples similar to theirs in an ad campaign.
What I would most expect is the solution Engadget proposed -- a settlement. Apple announces some low-power, carbon-neutral, eco-buzzword of the day compliant version of the iPod or the Mini or something, and co-advertise it with NYC in some eco-friendly computing campaign.
I very much doubt this will end up being decided by the trademark office; I very much think Apple will 'let' them use their trademark (deserved or not) in exchange for an Apple-funded cross promotion of some sort. NYC would be stupid not to take the added advertisement that an Apple ad campaign would give them, and Apple gains very much among their key demographic by being associated with a group working to provide green _____.
I am not saying this is the case, but people associating Apple with the environment could be a bad thing when the next Greenpeace report lambasting them comes out (because lets face it, there is no way Greenpeace won't lambast Apple again. It gets them way too much press coverage.)
If, at some point, Apple wants to start a campaign about eco-friendly computing with some new eco-friendly computer that they sometime release, they damn sure want to be able to market it under their logo. The existence of the NYC trademark may keep them from doing so, so they oppose it. It's really not that hard; they want to keep their options open, and so don't want there to be another company using a logo similar to theirs.
Well, judging by the amount of time Greenpeace spends bashing Apple based on their environmental policy, I would say that Apple does have a stake in people associating them with the environment - especially because it is entirely within the realm of reason for them to want to release an 'environmentally friendly' computer at some point, and if NYC has this logo they may be kept from advertising it with their logo.
Then again, I would expect this challenge to occur from ANY company with a similar logo. If NYC was using a freaking mattress for some reason, I would expect Sealy/serta to file a challenge (well, bad example because I don't think sealy/serta actually use a mattress, but you get the point). That is just how the system is supposed to work.
Nothing about this challenge means that Apple will automatically win. I really don't see why so many people are opposed to apple using the system that is set up so that they DON'T have to use the courts to settle something?
I'm sorry, but this is the point of having registered trademarks; to have a legal way to protect the MARKs that you TRADE with. Apple has a stake in anything that wants to use a picture of an Apple, and I would expect them to file a brief opposing it no matter the product.
What you don't seem to realize is that this is the purpose of trademarks; Someone wants to use an image/slogan/whathaveyou, and other people have a window when they can say 'I disapprove, because it looks like mine that I have a trademark on,' and then the trademark office goes through the application and all the comments and decides if the applicant can use what it wants to. THIS IS THE SYSTEM WORKING AS INTENDED.
Can you really say that Apple doesn't have a stake in other companies using Apples for logos? Because that's what saying they shouldn't file this complaint is saying.
Hey/.! How about posting about 'filing suit' when it actually happens, and not when someone lacks basic reading comprehension? Not even in TFA does it mention a legal dispute; it says it filed a challenge to NYC's trademark application.
I believe this article needs to be tagged 'adaylateandadollarshort'
Would you like a copy of the source of my OSX kernel? I have it... I got it from Apple, even. Heck, I could post it right here, right now... its BSD licensed.
Unless, of course, you were talking about the replaceable UI part of the distribution, in which case I will tell you that people with Macs are fully capable of replacing those parts of their OS with Gnome (google gnome on darwin if you don't believe me). Would that make it more palatable to you? Or would you still say that it isn't Linux-like?
Look, I am not saying I love Apple. All I am saying is that the *OPERATING SYSTEM* that ships with OSX is as open as you could want it. It is the overlying UI and applications that should be more open. None of that changes the fact that the OS itself is BSD licensed, and I am perfectly capable (although I choose not to) of running an entirely libre installation of OSX.
Okay, so the closed-source *UI* and *APPLICATIONS* are your problems, then. So comparing it to Linux is a specious argument; you should be comparing it to Gnome/KDE/XFCE, etc.
In terms of the Operating System, it is Open Source, and I actually *can* modify it from the kernel up. Google "gnome on Darwin" if you don't believe me.
Choosing to stick with the default closed source UI is my choice as a user; I have other options available to me. The Kernel itself is free-er than Linux; unless, of course, you don't think BSD is free.
Hell, even twitter himself sometimes makes sense. Sometimes he even writes something insightful and not entirely offensive.
However, due to more alter egos I can readily remember, even the positive moderations he gets might get turned over if I get to metamoderate them.
As far as I'm concerned, he can eiter grow up and learn to communicate or suffer the consequences of getting on my nerves. Unless you have proof that Twitter is the same as those people, which you don't unless you have access to IP logs or a videotape of the guy switching back and forth between them, anything else is an unproven hypothesis. I will admit that it is not an assumption, but its only half a step above it (if that)
In regards to you not metamoderating falsely: The reason I assumed that is due to the bolded parts above. I can see your point, but I try to (and know that I can't really succeed at, but trying is better than not trying) to come at metamodding from a critical viewpoint fairly often. Too many people (even beyond Twitter) have 2 accounts, and will use one to moderate the other. Whether or not they are Twitter, it is something to watch out for.
The not/or sentence construction is grammatically incorrect, unless you mean that OSX is
(not linux-like) or (able to run Windows apps natively) Proper usage would be to say,
Mac OSX is neither Linux-like nor able to run a Windows app natively. Now that that's out of the way:
Mac OSX is, for all intents and purposes, Linux-like. It includes a BSD-derived kernel, and I can use a lot of standard GNU tools, either direct from Apple or through MacPorts, Fink, etc. But for the sake of argument, lets go through the two definitions of Linux-like
So if your definition of Linux-like uses Linux as a kernel, then yes, OSX is Linux-like because it is basically BSD, which most people admit is Linux-like, as they are both Open Source kernels and Unix-like.
If your definition of Linux-like is using the 'GNU over Linux' definition, then the availability of the GNU tools, the X Windowing System being installed either by default or at least on the install disk, and the existence of tools like Fink and MacPorts seems to imply that, in fact, OSX is Linux-like.
As for the ability to run Windows apps natively, the existence of Parallels and VMWare seem to imply otherwise. Neither of them are emulation, just virtualization, so it would seem to me that they offer native execution of Windows Apps.
And I really hope you don't try to deny that OSX is a professional, commercial OS. Because I might have to laugh if you make that claim.
So you will intentionally metamoderate *falsely* just to stick it to Twitter? To me, it doesn't sound like HE's the one that needs to grow up...
Keep in mind, you really have no evidence at all that Twitter is any of those people, and yet some seem more convinced about it than I think the evidence warrants.
For the sake of the intarwebs, please take a step back, look at it from a bit farther away, and decide something:
Regardless of whether or not Twitter is all of these accounts, are you willing to censor someones beliefs based on an assumption?
I dunno, Peter Berg did a decent job with Friday Night Lights... and then did it again with the TV show as a producer.
While it may not be a perfect movie, he captured the 'feeling' behind the book. If he can do for Dune what he did for Friday Night Lights, I would call that a good translation.
Then again, to me the main point of books like Dune isn't exactly what happens, but the message behind what happens. I would be more okay with them changing the plot than changing the message (not to say that I want him to change anything, but just if I had to choose one).
That's correct. Firefox is not a technology, it is a product. The technology behind firefox is the Gecko Engine, and Cairo, and [etc. etc. etc.].
Oh, I'm sorry, you were trying to make an argument that proved the GP was being inconsistent? I'm sorry, I didn't gather that over the fact that you were, indeed, correct, despite the fact that you were thinking you weren't. Sorry about that.
Well, then, if you can say that something with a human shape isn't human, then you have reserved yourself the right to judge what humanity is. So, why would it be so wrong for someone else to claim the same right? Well, yes, they are allowed to decide that... for themselves. They have no call to force their decision on anybody - much as I am not forcing mine on them. Amazing how those false dilemmas can be navigated around when you spend more than 2 seconds thinking about something, isn't it?
No, we send soldiers to kill and die because they are fighting an enemy that has been the historic bane of the existence of western civilization for 1500 years. Well, at least you're proving that we didn't go to war for lies.
We set ourselves up as judges to execute murderers because, frankly, I think someone like Tookie deserved to be executed. Lets see... Tookie killed 3 people before he was caught. In prison, he killed no one. So we can assume (reasonably) that had he stayed in prison, he would likely have killed less than three more people. So, assuming he killed six total (which he didn't), you still need to find 33 more deaths before you match the number of innocent people killed by the death penalty in Texas alone
This is tiring, and the rest of your sermon looks like blatant demagoguery, so I think I'll leave it at that for now. Next time, try to bring an argument that makes sense perhaps?
This is no more flamebait than saying 'Some people might say it doesn't look a day over 6000 years. They're wrong.'
And thats taken straight from the summary!
You know, suprising as it seems, the VC is not actually that big of a rip-off (depending on the title). Cost analysis has shown that it can be cheaper to byt the VC versions than their physical counterparts, especially for rarer titles. So while it seems like they are overpriced, with many exceptions (mainly the popular games), it can be cheaper to buy it off VC than used - not to mention the developers/publishers of the game get some money in that case.
Nebraska: Providing more incentive to gerrymander since 1992.
Re:what about the DRM "feature"?
on
ZOMG New Zunes
·
· Score: 0
From this article
They are eliminating the time requirement, and letting you share music that was shared to you, but keeping the 3 listens. But you can still squirt to your heart's content! Also, it will still be DRM'd squirts. They are just a bit less limited.
Your precognition intrigue me, and I would like to know more.
For example, are there holy wars between those who follow the great Google, and those who worship the iGod?
Also, there are these private messages asking me for sex, hooking up, or unspeakable acts? Oh, right, I read slashdot. Well, I would still like to know about the religious dynamics of this world. Is there a subculture of people what worship Microsoft and wear red, blue, green, and yellow colored clothes? Is Ubuntu Christian Edition *really* what jesus would download?
These are questions that need answering, man! I need to go ahead and start these religions now. I mean, hey - it worked for L. Ron Hubbard...
Slashdot Mirror
View it like this: if there is a significant discrepancy between voting trends in paper-ballot w/ audit counties, and those that decided not to opt-in, those counties may have an angry electorate on their hands that would demand an explanation.
If they can't offer a suitable explanation due to a lack of a paper trail because they decided not to accept free money from the feds... well, I am not going to say they *would* be in trouble because the American Electorate is notorious for not caring, but there would at least be some eyebrows raised.
It works beautifully with Amazon's store.
Oh, and my Zen works well with EMI's stuff on iTunes.
Or are you implying that somehow, Apple should be offering all its music DRM-free against the wishes of the copyright holders? Because at this point, it's no longer Apple that wants the DRM on that music... (Video is another matter: Hey Steve! How about you use your weight on Disney's board to remove the DRM from the Disney movies you sell on iTunes Store?)
You're blaming this on Apple fanboys? Seriously? Until the MacBook started with glossy, the *only* laptops I had seen with glossy were PCs. Maybe I just missed out on a huge part of apple history, but did any Mac before the MacBook even come with glossy?
If any company is responsible for glossy, it's not Apple. They didn't even offer glossy on the MBP until after the MB came out.
Oh, and after searching to figure out what you were talking about with Intel and the 80486, I found out that it was INTEL that was not allowed to use it because someone else had the trademark on the 80___ prefix. So while Intel did lose, and had to name their processor "i486", thats because someone else already had the trademark that prevented them from calling it "80486"! Interesting how you mistook the facts in a case you yourself brought up...
Copyright != trademark. Come back when you know the issue at hand, and can make rational, intelligent conversation instead of making blind comments about complete nonsequitors.
I agree. The counterclaim should be exactly as effective. They both should be given equal weight by the trademark arbiter, and a decision made based on the merits of each of their cases. I could easily see them deciding that the uses were different enough to grant NYC's trademark. I can also understand Apple having qualms about other companies using apples similar to theirs in an ad campaign.
What I would most expect is the solution Engadget proposed -- a settlement. Apple announces some low-power, carbon-neutral, eco-buzzword of the day compliant version of the iPod or the Mini or something, and co-advertise it with NYC in some eco-friendly computing campaign.
I very much doubt this will end up being decided by the trademark office; I very much think Apple will 'let' them use their trademark (deserved or not) in exchange for an Apple-funded cross promotion of some sort. NYC would be stupid not to take the added advertisement that an Apple ad campaign would give them, and Apple gains very much among their key demographic by being associated with a group working to provide green _____.
I am not saying this is the case, but people associating Apple with the environment could be a bad thing when the next Greenpeace report lambasting them comes out (because lets face it, there is no way Greenpeace won't lambast Apple again. It gets them way too much press coverage.)
If, at some point, Apple wants to start a campaign about eco-friendly computing with some new eco-friendly computer that they sometime release, they damn sure want to be able to market it under their logo. The existence of the NYC trademark may keep them from doing so, so they oppose it. It's really not that hard; they want to keep their options open, and so don't want there to be another company using a logo similar to theirs.
Well, judging by the amount of time Greenpeace spends bashing Apple based on their environmental policy, I would say that Apple does have a stake in people associating them with the environment - especially because it is entirely within the realm of reason for them to want to release an 'environmentally friendly' computer at some point, and if NYC has this logo they may be kept from advertising it with their logo.
Then again, I would expect this challenge to occur from ANY company with a similar logo. If NYC was using a freaking mattress for some reason, I would expect Sealy/serta to file a challenge (well, bad example because I don't think sealy/serta actually use a mattress, but you get the point). That is just how the system is supposed to work.
Nothing about this challenge means that Apple will automatically win. I really don't see why so many people are opposed to apple using the system that is set up so that they DON'T have to use the courts to settle something?
I'm sorry, but this is the point of having registered trademarks; to have a legal way to protect the MARKs that you TRADE with. Apple has a stake in anything that wants to use a picture of an Apple, and I would expect them to file a brief opposing it no matter the product.
What you don't seem to realize is that this is the purpose of trademarks; Someone wants to use an image/slogan/whathaveyou, and other people have a window when they can say 'I disapprove, because it looks like mine that I have a trademark on,' and then the trademark office goes through the application and all the comments and decides if the applicant can use what it wants to. THIS IS THE SYSTEM WORKING AS INTENDED.
Can you really say that Apple doesn't have a stake in other companies using Apples for logos? Because that's what saying they shouldn't file this complaint is saying.
Well, that might be true... if there were a lawsuit involved at all.
/.! How about posting about 'filing suit' when it actually happens, and not when someone lacks basic reading comprehension? Not even in TFA does it mention a legal dispute; it says it filed a challenge to NYC's trademark application.
Hey
I believe this article needs to be tagged 'adaylateandadollarshort'
Would you like a copy of the source of my OSX kernel? I have it... I got it from Apple, even. Heck, I could post it right here, right now... its BSD licensed.
Unless, of course, you were talking about the replaceable UI part of the distribution, in which case I will tell you that people with Macs are fully capable of replacing those parts of their OS with Gnome (google gnome on darwin if you don't believe me). Would that make it more palatable to you? Or would you still say that it isn't Linux-like?
Look, I am not saying I love Apple. All I am saying is that the *OPERATING SYSTEM* that ships with OSX is as open as you could want it. It is the overlying UI and applications that should be more open. None of that changes the fact that the OS itself is BSD licensed, and I am perfectly capable (although I choose not to) of running an entirely libre installation of OSX.
Yeah, my argument about Parallels and VMWare applies to Linux as well, as well as to Wine (after all, wine is not emulation)
Okay, so the closed-source *UI* and *APPLICATIONS* are your problems, then. So comparing it to Linux is a specious argument; you should be comparing it to Gnome/KDE/XFCE, etc.
In terms of the Operating System, it is Open Source, and I actually *can* modify it from the kernel up. Google "gnome on Darwin" if you don't believe me.
Choosing to stick with the default closed source UI is my choice as a user; I have other options available to me. The Kernel itself is free-er than Linux; unless, of course, you don't think BSD is free.
And yes, parallels allows native execution.
In regards to you not metamoderating falsely: The reason I assumed that is due to the bolded parts above. I can see your point, but I try to (and know that I can't really succeed at, but trying is better than not trying) to come at metamodding from a critical viewpoint fairly often. Too many people (even beyond Twitter) have 2 accounts, and will use one to moderate the other. Whether or not they are Twitter, it is something to watch out for.
Mac OSX is, for all intents and purposes, Linux-like. It includes a BSD-derived kernel, and I can use a lot of standard GNU tools, either direct from Apple or through MacPorts, Fink, etc. But for the sake of argument, lets go through the two definitions of Linux-like
So if your definition of Linux-like uses Linux as a kernel, then yes, OSX is Linux-like because it is basically BSD, which most people admit is Linux-like, as they are both Open Source kernels and Unix-like.
If your definition of Linux-like is using the 'GNU over Linux' definition, then the availability of the GNU tools, the X Windowing System being installed either by default or at least on the install disk, and the existence of tools like Fink and MacPorts seems to imply that, in fact, OSX is Linux-like.
As for the ability to run Windows apps natively, the existence of Parallels and VMWare seem to imply otherwise. Neither of them are emulation, just virtualization, so it would seem to me that they offer native execution of Windows Apps.
And I really hope you don't try to deny that OSX is a professional, commercial OS. Because I might have to laugh if you make that claim.
So you will intentionally metamoderate *falsely* just to stick it to Twitter? To me, it doesn't sound like HE's the one that needs to grow up...
Keep in mind, you really have no evidence at all that Twitter is any of those people, and yet some seem more convinced about it than I think the evidence warrants.
For the sake of the intarwebs, please take a step back, look at it from a bit farther away, and decide something:
Regardless of whether or not Twitter is all of these accounts, are you willing to censor someones beliefs based on an assumption?
I dunno, Peter Berg did a decent job with Friday Night Lights... and then did it again with the TV show as a producer.
While it may not be a perfect movie, he captured the 'feeling' behind the book. If he can do for Dune what he did for Friday Night Lights, I would call that a good translation.
Then again, to me the main point of books like Dune isn't exactly what happens, but the message behind what happens. I would be more okay with them changing the plot than changing the message (not to say that I want him to change anything, but just if I had to choose one).
That's correct. Firefox is not a technology, it is a product. The technology behind firefox is the Gecko Engine, and Cairo, and [etc. etc. etc.]. Oh, I'm sorry, you were trying to make an argument that proved the GP was being inconsistent? I'm sorry, I didn't gather that over the fact that you were, indeed, correct, despite the fact that you were thinking you weren't. Sorry about that.
This is tiring, and the rest of your sermon looks like blatant demagoguery, so I think I'll leave it at that for now. Next time, try to bring an argument that makes sense perhaps?
This is no more flamebait than saying 'Some people might say it doesn't look a day over 6000 years. They're wrong.' And thats taken straight from the summary!
You know, suprising as it seems, the VC is not actually that big of a rip-off (depending on the title). Cost analysis has shown that it can be cheaper to byt the VC versions than their physical counterparts, especially for rarer titles. So while it seems like they are overpriced, with many exceptions (mainly the popular games), it can be cheaper to buy it off VC than used - not to mention the developers/publishers of the game get some money in that case.
Maybe with *your* saved search history. What? Google has to use the information they save from your browsing somehow :-)
Nebraska: Providing more incentive to gerrymander since 1992.
From this article They are eliminating the time requirement, and letting you share music that was shared to you, but keeping the 3 listens. But you can still squirt to your heart's content! Also, it will still be DRM'd squirts. They are just a bit less limited.
Your precognition intrigue me, and I would like to know more. For example, are there holy wars between those who follow the great Google, and those who worship the iGod? Also, there are these private messages asking me for sex, hooking up, or unspeakable acts? Oh, right, I read slashdot. Well, I would still like to know about the religious dynamics of this world. Is there a subculture of people what worship Microsoft and wear red, blue, green, and yellow colored clothes? Is Ubuntu Christian Edition *really* what jesus would download? These are questions that need answering, man! I need to go ahead and start these religions now. I mean, hey - it worked for L. Ron Hubbard...