Back in 2006, when the iPhone was but a gleam in Steve Jobs' eye.
And now there are lots of 'app stores'; including Apple's, but also including the Android app store, and others.
So... where is Apple's eligibility for using this descriptive non-creative name as a trademark, if they do not have exclusive use, first use, or even most famous use in commerce?
As far as I'm concerned, Apple's product is the iTunes App Store, which is specific and famous, but App Store is generic, and used by many organization's before and after Apple.
Actually.. when I think of "App Store", the first thing that comes to mind for most people is the Android App Store. If anyone should be awarded the trademark (and they should not), it should be Google.
Chrome has 13.5%, which is more than Safari, Opera and all mobile browsers combined.
The big 3 browsers are IE, FF, and Chrome, so yes, this is significant.
After people hear more about this move, the big 3 browsers might be IE, FF, and Opera, again.
People will not be happy when bunches of websites stop working for them because they are using chrome.
PNG is not at all a replacement for JPG. It has nowhere near the same feature set. PNG is a replacement for non-animated GIF only.
Have you seriously never heard of animated PNG? There is a capability for.PNG files to be animated; your browser might not support it for some reason, but that would probable be due to having an ancient/outdated implementation of PNG
In most cases PNG IS indeed a replacement for JPG; there is exactly one meaningful feature that PNG lacks, lossy compression. However, there will be cases where JPG is more suitable, primarily with photographic data.
The major issue with using PNG for such files is file size due to lossless compression of PNG.
The only real way to perform lossy compression with PNG is to have fewer pixels by shrinking the image dimensions and scale the image size (through stretching), while displaying.
PNG is a replacement for GIF, and is a bit more advanced than GIF, in regards to support for transparency. As with GIF, the compression is lossless.
Because WebM is apparently not free of patent encumberance, but they got to dig a bit to figure out which patents they are going to say are essential for implementation of VP8.
This wouldn't be that hard to do. Spammers hit government addresses like anything else. Hit the purveyors of the product, the people who hire the spammers, with a nasty "kill your business for good" level fine for every product that goes out in a spamming campaign - problem solved, none of these guys will ever be so stupid as to hire a spammer again.
Yes, but they will hire spammers for a different reason. To advertise their competitor's product,
in order to nuke the competition. Then once the competition is gone, sales will increase, and they can boost prices
Since there's not a shred of GPL'd code in WinMTR, and there are no copyright owners other than the maintainer, they have the right to release new versions under a proprietary license at any time they choose to.
*su/sudo'ing to a "wheel" account, or changing said account's privileges, requires the authorization of at least one other wheel'ed user.
And then after that authorization you are back to a superuser scenario.
Once su'ing root, user just manually starts a custom daemon on port 1234 that lets anyone knowing a secret code execute commands,
or VI's the password file to add another wheel user, so he can authorize all his own requests in the future (by opening a second login session).
There is nothing requiring them to continue to make available any of their own code that they had previously released GPLed.
However, they hosted the code on SourceForge. And SourceForge has a right to continue to make available the archives and version control history of their software from before it was GPL.
Part of the sourceforge terms of service is all products have to be GPL, and you can't destroy/remove your code, except under certain extenuating circumstances such as a court order requiring them to take down the archives
Guys, on the WinMTR page (linked in summary), it explicitly states that it is an update to a 10 year old abandoned linux/unix utility called MTR.
The trouble with this is that MTR was never "abandoned".
If it was, there might be noone to pursue this, and they might have gotten away scott free with this, but there is still a maintainer for MTR and there are even recent releases.
If the program hasn't been maintained or updated in 10 years, wouldn't it be classified as Abandonware (much as old PC games get classified by those who want to share them?)
MTR is not abandonware; it is still actively maintained.
As for WinMTR however.... who knows.
If you're entering a port where a) pirates could be lurking or b) you could bribe enough staff to look the other way, you have no business being in that port.
Well, the point is ships have to put their guns away before entering port, not while they are at port.
They would be vulnerable for a time after they collect and lock up all the guns, but before they approach the port for permission to enter.
By "bribed to look the other way"; I mean one person would be bribed to delay the port officer coming aboard for inspection, papers, and the captain surrendering gun safe keys to the port master, before being permitted to enter port for as long as possible.
Until the ship enters port, they are still in international waters, and the unarmed port officials have no ability or authority to prevent
pirates from taking out a vessel that was waiting to try to gain access.
Airbags are expensive, but there is a reason they're in cars.
Yes, but airbags are included because accidents and death in accidents are a high enough rate to easily justify effective additional safety measures, particularly when they are inexpensive and easily incorporated in the vehicle design, and airbags are relatively inexpensive and appropriate for vehicles, given the amount of effectiveness.
However, cars are not equipped with $100,000 anti-accident systems.
At least the cars that individuals purchase are not.
There's a chance another driver could pull a gun out and start shooting at your car, and there are anti-bullet armor technologies available for vehicles, but your personal vehicle is probably not equipped with any.
At-risk vehicles, such as armored cars, and cars carrying officials, are a different matter, more expensive safety systems might be needed to mitigate any large risks
to deal with a problem that affects under 1% of the ships passing through that area?
I'm fairly sure that that sound I hear in the distance is the actuaries at Lloyds laughing through their stiff upper lips...
The actuaries at LLoyds would be laughing all the way to the bank, due to the increased liability that results from having automated weapon systems on board that might shoot at harmless innocent "targets", not to mention all that live ammo on board.
A better proposition would be to deck the large ships out with grenade launchers, tear gas/pepper bombs, and smoke bombs.
At least if the "pirates" who turned out to be innocent local fishermen are hit, there won't be as big a diplomatic incident as civillian vessels from other big bad other countries, bringing armed vessels into their waters and killing fishermen, when it is not even legal for civillian vessels to carry such weapons in some of the countries, due to local law, or (in some cases) international arms embargo, that forbids carrying armaments such as gatling guns or ammo into certain countries' territory, regardless of whether they are attached to a boat from another country or not.
In the continuation on page E68 towards the bottom you'll notice "dash camera footage is missing"
Always have a hidden backup camera with satellite uplink and an assistant at remote location sitting at keyboard ready to push a red "post to youtube" panic button.
Citizen cell phones with streaming video are also a good idea.
And make traffic stops near "safety" / "traffic camera" points. Destroying dash cam footage just adds 'defacing government property' to the list of criminal charges.
That's why we've got a city ordinance banning black vans.
They don't dare enter; they'd be pulled over and ticketed. And you know how much people in black vans like to be pulled over and have to show identity?
Not that I would expect the original schematics to be available to the world, since all that stuff is considered to be quite proprietary by the manufacturers.
Now why would they consider schematics for a chip no longer produced to be so proprietary?
When do the lawsuits against these guys start rolling in for publishing images of copyright-protected visual arrangements of wires and transistors?
The proton pack is a placebo and it only works on novice ghosts. Truly geeky ghosts are immune and will counter proton pack attacks by sending minions known as Lawyers and EPA Agents to shut down ghost instigators.
If you looked back into my search history far enough, you could probably find places where I searched for all those different things in the past.
I wouldn't need to search for any website to tell me how to reverse polarity of a swimming pool motor, because it's basic electronics..
And yet, I have not murdered and will not murder anyone using those or any other methods.
Is it reasonable to suspect people of murder just because they have in the past searched for, found, or viewed material, that might relate to methods used by the murderer?
How is it even proven that the searches are born of some intent, and not merely idle curiosity, or FEAR for ones own safety?
Searches for: botulism. This is something every person needs to know about, because it poses a danger to everyone who eats food. People can protect themselves if they have some understanding of what the danger is, where you could be exposed to the toxin, how it could reach your mouth, how to detect it, how to recognize the first signs, what to do, etc
Searches for: poisoning. Same deal; it is a good idea to know what methods people might try to use to poison you, especially if you think someone is after you. A search for poisoning can relate to (as much) detecting/knowing if you're poisoned and/or what to do to protect/preserve life.
Searches for: pipe bombs. There were several high-profile media events. It would probably be a good idea for members of the general public to understand what exactly a pipe bomb is, how to recognize it, and who to contact or what to do (LEAVE QUICKLY/RUN), if you think you see what might be an explosive device that could threaten your life.
Searches for: mercury fulminate. Again, being able to recognize the signs of mercury poisoning is a good idea.
People learn more about a subject by hearing about it, and then looking up materials on the subject.
Would police have made such a deal of simple searches, if they were done by looking up books on the subject at the library?
Would a list of books checked out seriously be used to convict an alleged suspect?
After the moisture issue, he sent it back to the company, they told him it'd be a week, he demanded a full replacement of the machine according to some Greek law
"Some greek law?"
Well, as you can see from the OP, he obviously took it to them for warranty service, complaining about gray spots showing on the display, as an apple authorized service center, they would have an agreement to service Apple equipment under warranty for repairs and replacements.
They took it in and according to them, performed the repairs.
The problem, and it would appear, cause for him to complain, is he got it back in even worse shape. Complaint of moisture behind the LCD panel.
This would mean not only did they fail to perform the proper cleaning procedures, but they caused more damage to his display, and tried to hand it off to him as repaired.
Demand for replacement of the entire iMac may have been a bit much, but it seems like their customer could have good reason to be upset.
A week is a long time to go without a computer. If he were relying on this in some professional capacity, their 1st attempt failure at repair and unreasonably long timeframe for fixing their mistakes (A week?!) can be incurring significant costs for their customer.
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty sure Sales Force came first.
Back in 2006, when the iPhone was but a gleam in Steve Jobs' eye. And now there are lots of 'app stores'; including Apple's, but also including the Android app store, and others.
So... where is Apple's eligibility for using this descriptive non-creative name as a trademark, if they do not have exclusive use, first use, or even most famous use in commerce?
As far as I'm concerned, Apple's product is the iTunes App Store, which is specific and famous, but App Store is generic, and used by many organization's before and after Apple.
Actually.. when I think of "App Store", the first thing that comes to mind for most people is the Android App Store. If anyone should be awarded the trademark (and they should not), it should be Google.
Sorry. I said Opera, but I meant Safari.
After people hear more about this move, the big 3 browsers might be IE, FF, and Safari, again.
Chrome has 13.5%, which is more than Safari, Opera and all mobile browsers combined. The big 3 browsers are IE, FF, and Chrome, so yes, this is significant.
After people hear more about this move, the big 3 browsers might be IE, FF, and Opera, again. People will not be happy when bunches of websites stop working for them because they are using chrome.
PNG is not at all a replacement for JPG. It has nowhere near the same feature set. PNG is a replacement for non-animated GIF only.
Have you seriously never heard of animated PNG? There is a capability for .PNG files to be animated; your browser might not support it for some reason, but that would probable be due to having an ancient/outdated implementation of PNG
In most cases PNG IS indeed a replacement for JPG; there is exactly one meaningful feature that PNG lacks, lossy compression. However, there will be cases where JPG is more suitable, primarily with photographic data.
The major issue with using PNG for such files is file size due to lossless compression of PNG. The only real way to perform lossy compression with PNG is to have fewer pixels by shrinking the image dimensions and scale the image size (through stretching), while displaying.
PNG is a replacement for GIF, and is a bit more advanced than GIF, in regards to support for transparency. As with GIF, the compression is lossless.
If they can help to establish WebM as the de facto standard for Internet video, they don't have to be part of the H.264 patent pool.
Except MPEG-LA is already working on assembling a WebM/VP8 patent pool
Because WebM is apparently not free of patent encumberance, but they got to dig a bit to figure out which patents they are going to say are essential for implementation of VP8.
Once you haul the spammer in, it's easy enough to tell who paid him.
Yeah... some masked guy with a throwaway hotmail account, who paid the spammer in unmarked 100s and gold coins.
A retainer upfront, and then periodic amounts based on counted hits to the target.
This wouldn't be that hard to do. Spammers hit government addresses like anything else. Hit the purveyors of the product, the people who hire the spammers, with a nasty "kill your business for good" level fine for every product that goes out in a spamming campaign - problem solved, none of these guys will ever be so stupid as to hire a spammer again.
Yes, but they will hire spammers for a different reason. To advertise their competitor's product, in order to nuke the competition. Then once the competition is gone, sales will increase, and they can boost prices
Since there's not a shred of GPL'd code in WinMTR, and there are no copyright owners other than the maintainer, they have the right to release new versions under a proprietary license at any time they choose to.
That is some serious egg on Slashdot's face. "Hosting Company Appears To Be Violating the GPL"; it is presumed that WinMTR contains mtr code.
No fact checking? Seriously? Seems awfully negligent...
When can we have our old Slashdot back? I am tired of Rumors for Nerds, stuff that would matter if had a grain of truth
I think you meant Novell Privileged User Manager
and not priviledged
*su/sudo'ing to a "wheel" account, or changing said account's privileges, requires the authorization of at least one other wheel'ed user.
And then after that authorization you are back to a superuser scenario.
Once su'ing root, user just manually starts a custom daemon on port 1234 that lets anyone knowing a secret code execute commands, or VI's the password file to add another wheel user, so he can authorize all his own requests in the future (by opening a second login session).
Part of the sourceforge terms of service is all products have to be GPL
OOPS: all products have to be redistributable open source per the OSI definition
There is nothing requiring them to continue to make available any of their own code that they had previously released GPLed.
However, they hosted the code on SourceForge. And SourceForge has a right to continue to make available the archives and version control history of their software from before it was GPL.
Part of the sourceforge terms of service is all products have to be GPL, and you can't destroy/remove your code, except under certain extenuating circumstances such as a court order requiring them to take down the archives
Guys, on the WinMTR page (linked in summary), it explicitly states that it is an update to a 10 year old abandoned linux/unix utility called MTR.
The trouble with this is that MTR was never "abandoned". If it was, there might be noone to pursue this, and they might have gotten away scott free with this, but there is still a maintainer for MTR and there are even recent releases.
If the program hasn't been maintained or updated in 10 years, wouldn't it be classified as Abandonware (much as old PC games get classified by those who want to share them?)
MTR is not abandonware; it is still actively maintained. As for WinMTR however.... who knows.
If you're entering a port where a) pirates could be lurking or b) you could bribe enough staff to look the other way, you have no business being in that port.
Well, the point is ships have to put their guns away before entering port, not while they are at port.
They would be vulnerable for a time after they collect and lock up all the guns, but before they approach the port for permission to enter.
By "bribed to look the other way"; I mean one person would be bribed to delay the port officer coming aboard for inspection, papers, and the captain surrendering gun safe keys to the port master, before being permitted to enter port for as long as possible.
Until the ship enters port, they are still in international waters, and the unarmed port officials have no ability or authority to prevent pirates from taking out a vessel that was waiting to try to gain access.
Airbags are expensive, but there is a reason they're in cars.
Yes, but airbags are included because accidents and death in accidents are a high enough rate to easily justify effective additional safety measures, particularly when they are inexpensive and easily incorporated in the vehicle design, and airbags are relatively inexpensive and appropriate for vehicles, given the amount of effectiveness.
However, cars are not equipped with $100,000 anti-accident systems. At least the cars that individuals purchase are not.
There's a chance another driver could pull a gun out and start shooting at your car, and there are anti-bullet armor technologies available for vehicles, but your personal vehicle is probably not equipped with any.
At-risk vehicles, such as armored cars, and cars carrying officials, are a different matter, more expensive safety systems might be needed to mitigate any large risks
to deal with a problem that affects under 1% of the ships passing through that area?
I'm fairly sure that that sound I hear in the distance is the actuaries at Lloyds laughing through their stiff upper lips...
The actuaries at LLoyds would be laughing all the way to the bank, due to the increased liability that results from having automated weapon systems on board that might shoot at harmless innocent "targets", not to mention all that live ammo on board.
A better proposition would be to deck the large ships out with grenade launchers, tear gas/pepper bombs, and smoke bombs.
At least if the "pirates" who turned out to be innocent local fishermen are hit, there won't be as big a diplomatic incident as civillian vessels from other big bad other countries, bringing armed vessels into their waters and killing fishermen, when it is not even legal for civillian vessels to carry such weapons in some of the countries, due to local law, or (in some cases) international arms embargo, that forbids carrying armaments such as gatling guns or ammo into certain countries' territory, regardless of whether they are attached to a boat from another country or not.
Hence why they're locked up in the ship's gun safe when entering port.
Just before the ship is entering port... the perfect time for pirates to strike.
Especially after bribing the port commander to look the other way.
In the continuation on page E68 towards the bottom you'll notice "dash camera footage is missing"
Always have a hidden backup camera with satellite uplink and an assistant at remote location sitting at keyboard ready to push a red "post to youtube" panic button. Citizen cell phones with streaming video are also a good idea.
And make traffic stops near "safety" / "traffic camera" points. Destroying dash cam footage just adds 'defacing government property' to the list of criminal charges.
Swooped up by three guys in a black van
That's why we've got a city ordinance banning black vans.
They don't dare enter; they'd be pulled over and ticketed. And you know how much people in black vans like to be pulled over and have to show identity?
Not that I would expect the original schematics to be available to the world, since all that stuff is considered to be quite proprietary by the manufacturers.
Now why would they consider schematics for a chip no longer produced to be so proprietary?
When do the lawsuits against these guys start rolling in for publishing images of copyright-protected visual arrangements of wires and transistors?
The proton pack is a placebo and it only works on novice ghosts. Truly geeky ghosts are immune and will counter proton pack attacks by sending minions known as Lawyers and EPA Agents to shut down ghost instigators.
If you looked back into my search history far enough, you could probably find places where I searched for all those different things in the past.
I wouldn't need to search for any website to tell me how to reverse polarity of a swimming pool motor, because it's basic electronics..
And yet, I have not murdered and will not murder anyone using those or any other methods.
Is it reasonable to suspect people of murder just because they have in the past searched for, found, or viewed material, that might relate to methods used by the murderer?
How is it even proven that the searches are born of some intent, and not merely idle curiosity, or FEAR for ones own safety?
Would police have made such a deal of simple searches, if they were done by looking up books on the subject at the library? Would a list of books checked out seriously be used to convict an alleged suspect?
After the moisture issue, he sent it back to the company, they told him it'd be a week, he demanded a full replacement of the machine according to some Greek law
"Some greek law?" Well, as you can see from the OP, he obviously took it to them for warranty service, complaining about gray spots showing on the display, as an apple authorized service center, they would have an agreement to service Apple equipment under warranty for repairs and replacements.
They took it in and according to them, performed the repairs.
The problem, and it would appear, cause for him to complain, is he got it back in even worse shape. Complaint of moisture behind the LCD panel.
This would mean not only did they fail to perform the proper cleaning procedures, but they caused more damage to his display, and tried to hand it off to him as repaired.
Demand for replacement of the entire iMac may have been a bit much, but it seems like their customer could have good reason to be upset.
A week is a long time to go without a computer. If he were relying on this in some professional capacity, their 1st attempt failure at repair and unreasonably long timeframe for fixing their mistakes (A week?!) can be incurring significant costs for their customer.