"It's come to our attention that AT&T is filtering/blocking img.4chan.org (/b/ &/r9k/) for many of their customers. There is no remedy at this time.
If you've been affected, I would advise you call or write customer support and corporate immediately.
UPDATE: Some coverage on TechCrunch, Digg, reddit, and Google News. Also, note that AT&T has yet to contact us.
by moot @ 6:41 PM "
From a legal standpoint, I don't think so..
The Apple logo, name, etc are trademarked, yes...
The Vendor ID string is not. AFAIK, it's a separate technical entity that isn't covered under trademark law as it pertains to logos, sm's, tm's, etc..
If that were the case, there would be MANY legal issues going on out there with compatibility. If Apple breaks the iTunes code to only recognize
its' own Vendor ID, it's not looking for the word "Apple" - it's looking for a string.. Apple doesn't own the copyright to that string.
In the way of "teeth" - If Apple is violating the standard that they agreed to abide by, couldn't the group go so far as to say they will no longer let others use their Vendor ID to get iPods to connect to other devices? (ie: Windows itself, future accessories, etc..) ?
I wouldn't think it would be "not allowed" in this instance, if (as reported above) Palm is correct when telling on Apple for misuse of the USB vendor ID. This would then be a legal way of circumventing an illegal/not allowed block by Apple (in using the Vendor ID string as a vehicle to kill products from using its' software)
If this pisses off Apple enough, I could see them pushing an update for older iPods to change the way they are recognised by iTunes, maybe using a more complicated method that will only run on the OS that are on iPods.. If they start using a different method to verify an iPod is connected with something other than the Vendor ID (I think they will have to at some point, as if they don't, many more will follow Palms' example) then there could be an interesting war starting between Apple, and the masses.
This all of course assumes Apple doesn't go the lawyers route.. Something tells me there is an overly good chance of that happening, from their past tactics..
Has anyone that thinks the magical wonder of "smart" power use timing is great for the future, also thought about the possible implications of having more and more appliances
use off-peak timing? Wouldn't that eventually make that a peak time as well? This seems like a plus for the power company - they get a more level daily usage curve, while lowering
the "off-peak" times due to many appliances doing their thing late at night or early in the morning. By definition wouldn't that create a larger peak usage curve? (While yes, I
understand that some appliances will be taken off the daytime usage, and put on night usage, the supposed benifits of saving money on utility bills would likely push people to buy
at least a bit more in the way of off-peak usage appliances, evening out the disparity a bit..
It may just be me, but this sounds like a bit of an "Oops.." moment for a few people, while the utilities are smiling..
The context of what you originally said speaks for itself. You (as well as I) were speaking of NASA as a whole, and not "some NASA staff" "A dude at NASA" or "Several NASA Managers that give the final GO" - NASA as a whole (as it's generally referred to) predicts launch failures per thousand, etc... Your example isn't NASA in general, but a few morons given too much power.
I don't take issue with you calling out the culture problems down there, just your way of stating it in your original post as it being all of NASA that was wrong about the odds that day.
While I completely agree with most of your points above, a few may not have been well thought out before the fingers hit the keys:
"-In retrospect, NASA also predicted the safe outcome of the last Challenger launch."
Considering they have always run the shuttle program while figuring odds of catastrophic failure per launch, your above sentence makes no sense.
The horrible Challenger disaster was reported to be within those odds. If as a general numbers example, say, there is a one in five thousand chance
that you could get into a car accident while driving today, would that keep you from getting in your car on any given day? We all know that just driving
is a dangerous activity compared to many other things out there, but we don't let small odds run our activities. With your above statement, if a friend
predicted that you wouldn't get into an accident next Tuesday, and you then did - by your logic that would make it so no one could ever trust your
friend with anything ever again. A little narrow minded I.M.H.O..
"Ever notice how when something goes wrong at NASA, it almost always results in a massive, explosive failure, along with several deaths?"
That really doesn't mean that the general culture at NASA is unsafe - it simply means that the toilets clogging up don't make national news..
There are many smaller failures that you don't hear about on the 11pm news that don't result in death. Can you make the same statement you did
above about the US coal mining industry? It's generally a fairly safe industry (compared to other mining countries) considering the deaths per thousand
workers, but it IS extremely dangerous. - In order to accomplish certain jobs, you have to go through very dangerous odds. NASA is involved in those.
Not that I know a thing about rocket science (or the science of destroying them in spectacular fashion) but --IF-- this prediction were true,
could Nasa not come up with an alternative way of slowing the capsule down, such as gliding in some way? Maybe even use shape charges
to blow debree/bits-o-exploding-rocket away from the capsule? -- A bit like fighting (uncontrolled) fire with (controlled) fire..
Again, I don't claim to know anything about anything.. Just typing random thoughts..
with that setup, I would think you wouldn't need to worry about someone looking through the blinds - you'd be worried about still images being burned into the blinds themselves.. lol
"...fix a problem where Firefox on a Sparc platform would crash when visiting www.hp.com!"
Much like the memory leak to nowhere, It wasn't a problem - it was a feature!
# Gesture-enabled trackpad
hmm.. with xp, a non-removable battery pack, and just for the hell of it the.3mp webcam (hello 2000!) I've got a gesture for it - I wonder if it'll crash on receiving it..
You mean like they did with the first PC OS (Behind the original mac OS) that they copied, then improved on to basically take over the world? It seems like the system works for them...
If my old memory serves me, the headline is basically stating the same thing said by many IT managers when XP was coming out of beta. I would think that due to the fact that Vista has sucked on a scale not known since the bastard child that was born between 95 and XP, that is leading many to make these comments without fully vetting the OS for business environments. I by no means like MS, but I try to be fair. I would imagine that this will be a much more accurate statement to make if things stick a few months after 7 comes out..
So you didn't get the memo that the North Koreans tested missiles last year also around July 4th, and put out press releases from the national news agency stating that it was on purpose? In your example, being that major United States holidays are fairly well known all over the world, it doesn't hold water. If we used your example, how many U.S. based movies do you think a typical easterner knows, compared to how many movies/rock stars/etc, that you know from their land?
Being that it's straight up, and for only the first two and a half minutes, it's a fairly safe route to take. When there is a massive failure of the launch vehicle, it's doubtful that much of the debris will continue on it's original trajectory once failure (ie. explosion/incorrect separation) - Maybe the stress of continuing to be launched upward is considerably less than say, having an explosion, and going from thousands of miles an hour straight up, to instant jet to one side.. I'd rather eat scrambled eggs, not become them;) (Just my opinion, ymmv)
Slashdot Mirror
I have to get this thing up to 88mph, right?
"It's come to our attention that AT&T is filtering/blocking img.4chan.org (/b/ & /r9k/) for many of their customers. There is no remedy at this time.
If you've been affected, I would advise you call or write customer support and corporate immediately.
UPDATE: Some coverage on TechCrunch, Digg, reddit, and Google News. Also, note that AT&T has yet to contact us.
by moot @ 6:41 PM "
From a legal standpoint, I don't think so..
The Apple logo, name, etc are trademarked, yes...
The Vendor ID string is not. AFAIK, it's a separate technical entity that isn't covered under trademark law as it pertains to logos, sm's, tm's, etc..
If that were the case, there would be MANY legal issues going on out there with compatibility. If Apple breaks the iTunes code to only recognize
its' own Vendor ID, it's not looking for the word "Apple" - it's looking for a string..
Apple doesn't own the copyright to that string.
In the way of "teeth" - If Apple is violating the standard that they agreed to abide by, couldn't the group go so far as to say they will no longer let others use their Vendor ID to get iPods to connect to other devices? (ie: Windows itself, future accessories, etc..) ?
I wouldn't think it would be "not allowed" in this instance, if (as reported above) Palm is correct when telling on Apple for misuse of the USB vendor ID. This would then be a legal way of circumventing an illegal/not allowed block by Apple (in using the Vendor ID string as a vehicle to kill products from using its' software)
If this pisses off Apple enough, I could see them pushing an update for older iPods to change the way they are recognised by iTunes, maybe using a more complicated method that will only run on the OS that are on iPods.. If they start using a different method to verify an iPod is connected with something other than the Vendor ID (I think they will have to at some point, as if they don't, many more will follow Palms' example) then there could be an interesting war starting between Apple, and the masses.
This all of course assumes Apple doesn't go the lawyers route.. Something tells me there is an overly good chance of that happening, from their past tactics..
Disclaimer: I know nothing, about anything, ever.
Mod parent up - that is good information...
Has anyone that thinks the magical wonder of "smart" power use timing is great for the future, also thought about the possible implications of having more and more appliances
use off-peak timing? Wouldn't that eventually make that a peak time as well? This seems like a plus for the power company - they get a more level daily usage curve, while lowering
the "off-peak" times due to many appliances doing their thing late at night or early in the morning. By definition wouldn't that create a larger peak usage curve? (While yes, I
understand that some appliances will be taken off the daytime usage, and put on night usage, the supposed benifits of saving money on utility bills would likely push people to buy
at least a bit more in the way of off-peak usage appliances, evening out the disparity a bit..
It may just be me, but this sounds like a bit of an "Oops.." moment for a few people, while the utilities are smiling..
Disclaimer: I know nothing, about anything, ever.
The context of what you originally said speaks for itself. You (as well as I) were speaking of
NASA as a whole, and not "some NASA staff" "A dude at NASA" or "Several NASA Managers that give
the final GO" - NASA as a whole (as it's generally referred to) predicts launch failures
per thousand, etc... Your example isn't NASA in general, but a few morons given too much power.
I don't take issue with you calling out the culture problems down there, just your way of
stating it in your original post as it being all of NASA that was wrong about the odds that
day.
While I completely agree with most of your points above, a few may not have been well thought out before the fingers hit the keys:
"-In retrospect, NASA also predicted the safe outcome of the last Challenger launch."
Considering they have always run the shuttle program while figuring odds of catastrophic failure per launch, your above sentence makes no sense.
The horrible Challenger disaster was reported to be within those odds. If as a general numbers example, say, there is a one in five thousand chance
that you could get into a car accident while driving today, would that keep you from getting in your car on any given day? We all know that just driving
is a dangerous activity compared to many other things out there, but we don't let small odds run our activities. With your above statement, if a friend
predicted that you wouldn't get into an accident next Tuesday, and you then did - by your logic that would make it so no one could ever trust your
friend with anything ever again. A little narrow minded I.M.H.O..
"Ever notice how when something goes wrong at NASA, it almost always results in a massive, explosive failure, along with several deaths?"
That really doesn't mean that the general culture at NASA is unsafe - it simply means that the toilets clogging up don't make national news..
There are many smaller failures that you don't hear about on the 11pm news that don't result in death. Can you make the same statement you did
above about the US coal mining industry? It's generally a fairly safe industry (compared to other mining countries) considering the deaths per thousand
workers, but it IS extremely dangerous. - In order to accomplish certain jobs, you have to go through very dangerous odds. NASA is involved in those.
Not that I know a thing about rocket science (or the science of destroying them in spectacular fashion) but --IF-- this prediction were true,
could Nasa not come up with an alternative way of slowing the capsule down, such as gliding in some way? Maybe even use shape charges
to blow debree/bits-o-exploding-rocket away from the capsule? -- A bit like fighting (uncontrolled) fire with (controlled) fire..
Again, I don't claim to know anything about anything.. Just typing random thoughts..
Step 3) Keep PROFIT!
This could easily add hours of battery life to laptops in the future..
with that setup, I would think you wouldn't need to worry about someone looking through the blinds - you'd be worried about still images being burned into the blinds themselves.. lol
Just a little bit longer for the cross-marketing to kick in..
Mommy, why is the Special K flashing an ad for tampons?
I'll bet the farm something like that is in the not-so-distant future..
I'll be the first of the many here at /. to cry out "Bigger, Brighter, PORN!" as a single tear forms...
Anyone remember the disgraced "scientist" that claimed cloned babies, etc?
Maybe this only smells fishy because there's carp all over the damn place..
"...fix a problem where Firefox on a Sparc platform would crash when visiting www.hp.com!" Much like the memory leak to nowhere, It wasn't a problem - it was a feature!
# Gesture-enabled trackpad hmm.. with xp, a non-removable battery pack, and just for the hell of it the .3mp webcam (hello 2000!) I've got a gesture for it - I wonder if it'll crash on receiving it..
You mean like they did with the first PC OS (Behind the original mac OS) that they copied, then improved on to basically take over the world? It seems like the system works for them...
If my old memory serves me, the headline is basically stating the same thing said by many IT managers when XP was coming out of beta. I would think that due to the fact that Vista has sucked on a scale not known since the bastard child that was born between 95 and XP, that is leading many to make these comments without fully vetting the OS for business environments. I by no means like MS, but I try to be fair. I would imagine that this will be a much more accurate statement to make if things stick a few months after 7 comes out..
"Is he running Vista?"
That would have been great in the Get Smart TV series...
So you didn't get the memo that the North Koreans tested missiles last year also around July 4th, and put out press releases from the national news agency stating that it was on purpose? In your example, being that major United States holidays are fairly well known all over the world, it doesn't hold water. If we used your example, how many U.S. based movies do you think a typical easterner knows, compared to how many movies/rock stars/etc, that you know from their land?
Being that it's straight up, and for only the first two and a half minutes, it's a fairly safe route to take. When there is a massive failure of the launch vehicle, it's doubtful that much of the debris will continue on it's original trajectory once failure (ie. explosion/incorrect separation) - Maybe the stress of continuing to be launched upward is considerably less than say, having an explosion, and going from thousands of miles an hour straight up, to instant jet to one side.. I'd rather eat scrambled eggs, not become them ;) (Just my opinion, ymmv)
of the efforts and genius that is going into these.. (ok, moment over, bash away..)