I'm sorry to inform you, you are completely mistaken here.
"Old style" Egypt was among the Arab world most enlightened countries. When I visited (while I was living in Israel, ~1995), I was reallly surprised to see how many older (then, ~50yr and older) people spoke in perfect English and were very well cultured. No, it's not (not just?) that they lived the last years of strong British influence, but that the Egyptian society was heavily open, westernized.
From what I talked there, what I understood, what I saw... The younger generation strongly leans more to a more traditional way of life. Probably, if they manage to overthrow Mubarak's regime, they will choose (and you cannot say that's not a democratic process!) a more Islam-friendly, maybe Islam-abiding regime.
I just bought my first Roomba (yes, first - I would buy a second one for sure!). They are not for sale in my country (Mexico), so I took the opportunity during a trip to New York. I didn't have much time, so I didn't shop around - and was prepared to pay up to $350 (yes, typical series 500 price). They are not available at every large store (i.e. I went to three Best Buys, with no luck, even if their system said they had in stock), and found a 400-series model at a Target. 200 dollars. Two virtual walls, one extra filter - Yes, I'd like to have some spare parts (i.e. a kit of brushes, some more filters).
I know one single opinion does not mean the whole Market is that way - but that's what I saw.
I am a long-time Rails user - Started playing with it before 1.0, and have applications in production since the 1.1 days.
Rails is _great_, and it helps lots to productivity. However, its community is too young - the whole "latest version or deep-fried" attitude really hurts.
A community of assorted modules' authors has sprung around Rails and its Agile practices, which is good. However, most of those modules (gems) have (contrary to Rails, which at last has grown and is a mature project by now) very unsound practices - Say, API-incompatible changes in minor versions, or announcing major versions every month or two. And then telling you that via Gems you can keep several co-installed version. Oh, but please, do not bother them to fix bugs in older versions. Or gems adding other gems as dependencies, even when said gems are nowhere near production quality.
I maintaining for Debian several Ruby modules. And believe me, while I try to do a decent job, it gets harder, and I have ended up maintaining a lot of crappy modules that were at some point dependencies... Or the "flavor of the day" which was superseded by a new, "faster, DRYer, nicer, better!" implementation... which gradually builds up cruft and gets replaced as well.
iBCS was not maintained because there was no real need for it anymore. 15 years ago, you often needed to run stuff that just would not exist on Linux, and today that's just not going to happen, except for very specific, very propietary stuff. And if you want propietary stuff, you will most likely pay for it. And the OS it runs on, becomes basically an afterthought.
When you buy a book, you're buying the physical media -- the paper and cover/spine/jacket/glue/stitching, and also the ink covering the page -- for what that's worth. You're also buying the consumption of the words. You're not buying the words or the right to reproduce them.
Precisely, you are buying one tangible item which happens to be the support of the real good you want to use, the knowledge/art/whatever that lies printed in its pages. It is hard -although possible- to copy, and has always been so.
However, today that hardship has changed. Photocopies are trivial to make and quite cheap. And if you go digital, copies are really free. What does this mean? That most probably, we need to find a different model. Possibly a model that does not require intermediaries, or that better models the real world.
In (one instance of -- Where I work) academic publishing, authors get 10% of the books' profit. It is a high percentage, still. And it is understood, as the required job to print a single book is nontrivial, and it does require materials, often not so cheap. However, if the reproduction price is close to zero even for the editor, probably the editor should lower the product's price, increase the author's percentage, and offer something that is of value to the buyer. DRM is just a way to try to perpetuate the old system, but is surely bound to fail in the long run.
Adding insult to injury... This is not the first time it happens.
The capital of Guatemala was originally founded near Iximché, an ancient Mayan settlement. It was soon abandoned IIRC due to native raids.
In 1527, the capital was re-founded at Almolonga (although already named Guatemala). It had to be abandoned in 1541 due to a terrible flood (after which the nearby Water Volcano got its name). That site is now known as "Ciudad Vieja" (Ancient City).
In 1543, the new capital of Guatemala was founded few kilometers from there, named "Santiago de los Caballeros de Guatemala". In 1773, earthquakes damaged the city so bad it had to be abandoned as well. It is now known as "Antigua Guatemala".
In 1776, a new city was built, called Nueva Guatemala de la Asunción. It is today the capital of Guatemala.
So... well, more holes in the ground will not scare them too much.
I hated it when I first knew that whenever I wrote good ol' ":-)" on my IM program, some clients displayed a yellow, stupid happy face.
I was a bit relieved (although I still don't like it) when I first saw what my contacts now see when I write to them at Gmail's Jabber - A nice:-) that stays as it was written for some seconds and then rotates to become a clearly recognizable happy face.
Anyway, this is not just an anecdote. Google's smiley reinterpretation feels very much like prior art.
It is clear you are not in the target group for generic virus writers... Partly, that's also a reason for me to have sudo quite limited in most of my servers - If I want to do "sudo bash", I will be turned down. That's what su is for. But anyway - How many users use sudo the way you mention? How many users even use sudo? I'd say most Ubuntites will use gksudo or something like that. And in an automatic fashion, even, without knowing about it.
Some Indian tribes developed a natural instinct to play dead upon hearing a gunshot. That allowed them to later recover consciousness and take revenge.
And thus having more fertile offspring, of course. That instinct is a beautiful proof of Darwinism.
Moore's law is describing the human abilities to make better processes leading to better miniaturization, leading to more precise printing of higher density transistors on smaller spaces. It is not a law that concerns natural processes, obviously -- And although it does hold true for now, it is bound to reach an end of life.
Moore's law will not be debunked, but we will surely go past it sooner or later. We cannot keep shrinking transistor size forever, as molecules and atoms give us an absolute minimum size, and upon reaching it, no law will replace Moore's - That will be it.
If Apple obviously doesn't want to play nice with Adobe, why should Adobe keep providing Apple with a main selling feature of Macs? (The supposed fact they're for multimedia work).
Probably because Apple is providing a main selling point for Adobe's software. Graphic design people like Apples (why? Don't ask me, I'm just a programmer). Adobe wants that market. Adobe wants to run on Apple.
What I meant in my comment is that we are not a country where you can say that (as the OP said) the land is in the hands of the indigenous population and the power in the hands of the Spanish descendents. We are a country where the population is mostly mixed. What does mostly mean? That we have a 7% population which is predominantly indigenous (that is, their main language is not Spanish, have indigenous cultural and physical traits, and are not integrated into the urban societies), and a similar percentage (cannot give you numbers, sorry) of relatively new immigrants (i.e. my grandparents arrived from Europe in the 1920s, so I am not part of the mestizo society physically - I am clearly different from the bulk of the population).
And yes, I said this about Latin America because there are many common points to our societies. You won't say that the USA or the developed European states, which do have massive immigration, are mestizo societies. The US is a very clearly racially-delimited society (even if just for cultural reasons or whatever, it does not imply policies).
I am sorry to tell you... but you are completely misinformed.
Mexico, as most of Latin America, is a mostly mixed society - Roughly 80% of our society is mestizo (in all of Latin America, only Guatemala, Paraguay and Bolivia have a higher percentage of inhabitants who identify themselves as indigenous), which means they do not have clear indigenous cultural traces (i.e. language, beliefs, even group identification). Of course, there is a lot of syncretism in our society, which means we are the result as much from the imposed Spanish culture as from the remains of the (several different) indigenous cultures.
Now, as for your asseverations: The land is not owned mostly by indigenous. And very few of the real landowners are indigenous - Even given that after the revolution (~1910-1925) there was a real redistribution of properties mainly in the 1930-1950s (Reforma Agraria). However, due to several shortsightings by the people in charge, the real result was the peasants never saw a better economy and are, to the day, miserable. And no, there is no point in bribing them, as they do not have any authority beyond their bits of land.
But the drug lords are taking advantage of the situation. Given the poverty, they can offer better payment for growing more, um... interesting crops. And yes, sometimes it is done by talking. Sometimes it is just done by force.
Now, the revolution did bring many interesting and IMO very positive changes, which endured for several decades. However, I feel the real spirit of the revolution died out by the 1960s, where corruption started skyrocketing, and when dissidency and social inclination started being prosecuted as if they were crimes. You can read lots about president Díaz Ordaz (1964-1970), Echeverría Álvarez (1970-1976) and López Portillo (1976-1982), regarding the students movement, the Tlatelolco massacre (a turning point for the country's history), the dirty war of the 1970s...
And even with almost 50 years distance (and 30 years of open neoliberalism), we still see some solid social constructs in Mexico, which, although deteriorated, are clearly results of our revolutionary process.
There are some peppers (i.e. what we in Mexico call pimiento morrón -- Paprika or sweet pepper, depending on whom you ask) that have _very_ high capsaicin levels, but is completely non-hot, at least to our standards (I know that even Argentinians use it for salads, and you can't get any more non-spicy than Argentinians;-) ).
...And with little to no knowledge about it -- Yes, I RTFA. Among the jewels:
During the same panel, Apple co-founders Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs approached Commodore with an Apple II prototype, which was much more advanced in color, graphics, sound and games. Apple at the time didn't have the money to make and sell the Apple II, and was hoping Commodore would push the design to market. Commodore, however, preferred to develop the Commodore 64 as a simpler, lower-cost, black-and-white-only machine.
I have no insight on the Steves' attempt... But if you say the C64 was black-and-white-only machine, it means you have never been close to one -- Its graphic capabilities were at least up to par with Apple ]['s. And its sound was incredibly better.
Oh, and if from TFA you go to the company's website, you will see something that is way closer to an Amiga descendent than a C64 descendent (two of their available operating systems are Amiga-relted -- AmigaOS and AROS). Of course, the machine is neither a C64 nor an Amiga.
It's almost as saying I have a Xerox PARC at my desktop only because it has a mouse and sorta-windows.
Jews believe the Messiah will come and will raise the dead from their graves. If my liver outlived me for 20 years in somebody else's body, the Messiah will have a hard time resurrecting me.
Jewish law forbids organ donation, as well as it forbids cremating the dead, as the body as a whole is holy and will get its life back in the aftermath of times.
Of course, we all know organs decompose and get eaten by worms and whatnot... But that is the justification, after all. Do not argue about logic with religious people!
Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is way unsafer than riding on the street. Why?
Hitting pedestrians is not (usually) fatal, but still, you don't want to do it. A pedestrian walks at 5Km/h tops. I usually ride at four times that speed. And you cannot ask pedestrians to expect somebody whooshing by -- You can expect a cyclist to be aware of faster, bigger objects.
Sidewalks' surface is -at least in my country- way less regular than the street. Hitting a 10cm hole or bump in the pavement can be quite nasty.
Cars going out of their garages are not expecting you to pass by. They usually back out a couple of meters to have good visibility of the street, and then wait more carefully. You risk being hit (or at least scared) by them.
Similar argument goes for crossing streets. Moving cars don't expect a fast object which cannot halt abruptly going by the sidewalk.
There are more arguments, that's only what I could think of right now.
Your assertion might be right if you don't live in a major city. I live in Mexico City, which is a huge monster by all standards. The most efficient transportation medium here is by bike, unless you are lucky enough to ride on the major high-speed urban roads on your way to work, and both live and work quite close to their entry/exit points.
I am by no means an athlete. My average cycling speed is between 20 and 25 Km/h. The city is mostly flat, and whenever I can, I bike to my destination on a ~20Km radius from home. My trips are usually way faster than when I go by car, and slightly faster than when I go by subway. And as there are no major hills on the road, it is not enough effort to make me a sweaty mess.
Yes, my workplace is where the hilly part starts, and I do arrive somewhat sweaty;-) But not enough to be stinky. Or at least, so I believe;-)
Whenever you see a triple-nested for-loop, it is obvious that an increase by one in any of the three dimensions (in any of the controlling variables) will multiply the number of loops that need to be evaluated, and that probably splitting the loop into two loops with double-nesting only, even if there is a bit of increased complexity in it. Hence, he might be able to do some optimization without formally stating that he reduced from O(n) to 2×O(n).
The O() notation is not overstated, of course, it is fundamental to understand. But it is easy to understand without the mathematical formalism underneath. Of course, understanding and applying it are two different things, and being able to see the full picture with the required level of detail is often helped by academic in-depth analysis.
At my university, we have over 40 HP LaserJet printers. About half of them are networked 1000 models (1020, 1015, 1050, 1300 IIRC). I have them all configured as Postscript printers at my Samba server, so I can freely just interchange their IPs in case I have to shuffle them around. And yes, sometimes they are slow (I'll try setting them as PCL printers, that's a good tip and we are a mostly uniform HP-shop anyway), but they all understand proper Postscript.
One thing often forgotten when talking about greener technologies is that even if it would not cost you, it would still cost us. Several alternatives have appeared over the years which seem cheaper on a purely monetary (number-of-dollars-spent), but have ended up being worse for the environment (i.e. natural depletion for a scarce or highly toxic component in the pre-processing, or higher costs of properly disposing of a component after its useful life is over), and fortunately are usually ruled out before it is too late.
I have recently read interesting studies about public perception on water sustainability, particularly in the El Salvador society. People are aware of the costs of water, and are (at least, apparently) willing to pay for its consumption -- But defend the right to spend it if they are charged for it. Do you want to swipe the street with running water? As long as you pay for it, it should be allowed. That's the wrong mindset: Resources cost far more than just the money you are charged for them. Common, shared resources should be of guaranteed sustainability, and the State should prohibit one person, no matter how wealthy, to spend over their fair share of any given resource.
In this case, what would be the real difference between this design patent and a trademark? I recognize the link between "I'm feeling lucky" and Google. If the patent is required to carry this phrase, how is it different than just getting a trademark on the phrase?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry to inform you, you are completely mistaken here.
"Old style" Egypt was among the Arab world most enlightened countries. When I visited (while I was living in Israel, ~1995), I was reallly surprised to see how many older (then, ~50yr and older) people spoke in perfect English and were very well cultured. No, it's not (not just?) that they lived the last years of strong British influence, but that the Egyptian society was heavily open, westernized.
From what I talked there, what I understood, what I saw... The younger generation strongly leans more to a more traditional way of life. Probably, if they manage to overthrow Mubarak's regime, they will choose (and you cannot say that's not a democratic process!) a more Islam-friendly, maybe Islam-abiding regime.
It even fits in a manila envelope!
I just bought my first Roomba (yes, first - I would buy a second one for sure!). They are not for sale in my country (Mexico), so I took the opportunity during a trip to New York. I didn't have much time, so I didn't shop around - and was prepared to pay up to $350 (yes, typical series 500 price). They are not available at every large store (i.e. I went to three Best Buys, with no luck, even if their system said they had in stock), and found a 400-series model at a Target. 200 dollars. Two virtual walls, one extra filter - Yes, I'd like to have some spare parts (i.e. a kit of brushes, some more filters).
I know one single opinion does not mean the whole Market is that way - but that's what I saw.
And yes, I am _very_ happy with the thing.
I am a long-time Rails user - Started playing with it before 1.0, and have applications in production since the 1.1 days.
Rails is _great_, and it helps lots to productivity. However, its community is too young - the whole "latest version or deep-fried" attitude really hurts.
A community of assorted modules' authors has sprung around Rails and its Agile practices, which is good. However, most of those modules (gems) have (contrary to Rails, which at last has grown and is a mature project by now) very unsound practices - Say, API-incompatible changes in minor versions, or announcing major versions every month or two. And then telling you that via Gems you can keep several co-installed version. Oh, but please, do not bother them to fix bugs in older versions. Or gems adding other gems as dependencies, even when said gems are nowhere near production quality.
I maintaining for Debian several Ruby modules. And believe me, while I try to do a decent job, it gets harder, and I have ended up maintaining a lot of crappy modules that were at some point dependencies... Or the "flavor of the day" which was superseded by a new, "faster, DRYer, nicer, better!" implementation... which gradually builds up cruft and gets replaced as well.
iBCS was not maintained because there was no real need for it anymore. 15 years ago, you often needed to run stuff that just would not exist on Linux, and today that's just not going to happen, except for very specific, very propietary stuff. And if you want propietary stuff, you will most likely pay for it. And the OS it runs on, becomes basically an afterthought.
Precisely, you are buying one tangible item which happens to be the support of the real good you want to use, the knowledge/art/whatever that lies printed in its pages. It is hard -although possible- to copy, and has always been so. However, today that hardship has changed. Photocopies are trivial to make and quite cheap. And if you go digital, copies are really free. What does this mean? That most probably, we need to find a different model. Possibly a model that does not require intermediaries, or that better models the real world. In (one instance of -- Where I work) academic publishing, authors get 10% of the books' profit. It is a high percentage, still. And it is understood, as the required job to print a single book is nontrivial, and it does require materials, often not so cheap. However, if the reproduction price is close to zero even for the editor, probably the editor should lower the product's price, increase the author's percentage, and offer something that is of value to the buyer. DRM is just a way to try to perpetuate the old system, but is surely bound to fail in the long run.
Adding insult to injury... This is not the first time it happens.
The capital of Guatemala was originally founded near Iximché, an ancient Mayan settlement. It was soon abandoned IIRC due to native raids.
In 1527, the capital was re-founded at Almolonga (although already named Guatemala). It had to be abandoned in 1541 due to a terrible flood (after which the nearby Water Volcano got its name). That site is now known as "Ciudad Vieja" (Ancient City).
In 1543, the new capital of Guatemala was founded few kilometers from there, named "Santiago de los Caballeros de Guatemala". In 1773, earthquakes damaged the city so bad it had to be abandoned as well. It is now known as "Antigua Guatemala".
In 1776, a new city was built, called Nueva Guatemala de la Asunción. It is today the capital of Guatemala.
So... well, more holes in the ground will not scare them too much.
I hated it when I first knew that whenever I wrote good ol' ":-)" on my IM program, some clients displayed a yellow, stupid happy face.
I was a bit relieved (although I still don't like it) when I first saw what my contacts now see when I write to them at Gmail's Jabber - A nice :-) that stays as it was written for some seconds and then rotates to become a clearly recognizable happy face.
Anyway, this is not just an anecdote. Google's smiley reinterpretation feels very much like prior art.
It is clear you are not in the target group for generic virus writers... Partly, that's also a reason for me to have sudo quite limited in most of my servers - If I want to do "sudo bash", I will be turned down. That's what su is for. But anyway - How many users use sudo the way you mention? How many users even use sudo? I'd say most Ubuntites will use gksudo or something like that. And in an automatic fashion, even, without knowing about it.
Some Indian tribes developed a natural instinct to play dead upon hearing a gunshot. That allowed them to later recover consciousness and take revenge.
And thus having more fertile offspring, of course. That instinct is a beautiful proof of Darwinism.
Moore's law is describing the human abilities to make better processes leading to better miniaturization, leading to more precise printing of higher density transistors on smaller spaces. It is not a law that concerns natural processes, obviously -- And although it does hold true for now, it is bound to reach an end of life.
Moore's law will not be debunked, but we will surely go past it sooner or later. We cannot keep shrinking transistor size forever, as molecules and atoms give us an absolute minimum size, and upon reaching it, no law will replace Moore's - That will be it.
Probably because Apple is providing a main selling point for Adobe's software. Graphic design people like Apples (why? Don't ask me, I'm just a programmer). Adobe wants that market. Adobe wants to run on Apple.
What I meant in my comment is that we are not a country where you can say that (as the OP said) the land is in the hands of the indigenous population and the power in the hands of the Spanish descendents. We are a country where the population is mostly mixed. What does mostly mean? That we have a 7% population which is predominantly indigenous (that is, their main language is not Spanish, have indigenous cultural and physical traits, and are not integrated into the urban societies), and a similar percentage (cannot give you numbers, sorry) of relatively new immigrants (i.e. my grandparents arrived from Europe in the 1920s, so I am not part of the mestizo society physically - I am clearly different from the bulk of the population).
And yes, I said this about Latin America because there are many common points to our societies. You won't say that the USA or the developed European states, which do have massive immigration, are mestizo societies. The US is a very clearly racially-delimited society (even if just for cultural reasons or whatever, it does not imply policies).
I am sorry to tell you... but you are completely misinformed.
Mexico, as most of Latin America, is a mostly mixed society - Roughly 80% of our society is mestizo (in all of Latin America, only Guatemala, Paraguay and Bolivia have a higher percentage of inhabitants who identify themselves as indigenous), which means they do not have clear indigenous cultural traces (i.e. language, beliefs, even group identification). Of course, there is a lot of syncretism in our society, which means we are the result as much from the imposed Spanish culture as from the remains of the (several different) indigenous cultures.
Now, as for your asseverations: The land is not owned mostly by indigenous. And very few of the real landowners are indigenous - Even given that after the revolution (~1910-1925) there was a real redistribution of properties mainly in the 1930-1950s (Reforma Agraria). However, due to several shortsightings by the people in charge, the real result was the peasants never saw a better economy and are, to the day, miserable. And no, there is no point in bribing them, as they do not have any authority beyond their bits of land.
But the drug lords are taking advantage of the situation. Given the poverty, they can offer better payment for growing more, um... interesting crops. And yes, sometimes it is done by talking. Sometimes it is just done by force.
Now, the revolution did bring many interesting and IMO very positive changes, which endured for several decades. However, I feel the real spirit of the revolution died out by the 1960s, where corruption started skyrocketing, and when dissidency and social inclination started being prosecuted as if they were crimes. You can read lots about president Díaz Ordaz (1964-1970), Echeverría Álvarez (1970-1976) and López Portillo (1976-1982), regarding the students movement, the Tlatelolco massacre (a turning point for the country's history), the dirty war of the 1970s...
And even with almost 50 years distance (and 30 years of open neoliberalism), we still see some solid social constructs in Mexico, which, although deteriorated, are clearly results of our revolutionary process.
There are some peppers (i.e. what we in Mexico call pimiento morrón -- Paprika or sweet pepper, depending on whom you ask) that have _very_ high capsaicin levels, but is completely non-hot, at least to our standards (I know that even Argentinians use it for salads, and you can't get any more non-spicy than Argentinians ;-) ).
...And with little to no knowledge about it -- Yes, I RTFA. Among the jewels:
I have no insight on the Steves' attempt... But if you say the C64 was black-and-white-only machine, it means you have never been close to one -- Its graphic capabilities were at least up to par with Apple ]['s. And its sound was incredibly better.
Oh, and if from TFA you go to the company's website, you will see something that is way closer to an Amiga descendent than a C64 descendent (two of their available operating systems are Amiga-relted -- AmigaOS and AROS). Of course, the machine is neither a C64 nor an Amiga.
It's almost as saying I have a Xerox PARC at my desktop only because it has a mouse and sorta-windows.
Jews believe the Messiah will come and will raise the dead from their graves. If my liver outlived me for 20 years in somebody else's body, the Messiah will have a hard time resurrecting me.
Jewish law forbids organ donation, as well as it forbids cremating the dead, as the body as a whole is holy and will get its life back in the aftermath of times.
Of course, we all know organs decompose and get eaten by worms and whatnot... But that is the justification, after all. Do not argue about logic with religious people!
Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is way unsafer than riding on the street. Why?
There are more arguments, that's only what I could think of right now.
Your assertion might be right if you don't live in a major city. I live in Mexico City, which is a huge monster by all standards. The most efficient transportation medium here is by bike, unless you are lucky enough to ride on the major high-speed urban roads on your way to work, and both live and work quite close to their entry/exit points.
I am by no means an athlete. My average cycling speed is between 20 and 25 Km/h. The city is mostly flat, and whenever I can, I bike to my destination on a ~20Km radius from home. My trips are usually way faster than when I go by car, and slightly faster than when I go by subway. And as there are no major hills on the road, it is not enough effort to make me a sweaty mess.
Yes, my workplace is where the hilly part starts, and I do arrive somewhat sweaty ;-) But not enough to be stinky. Or at least, so I believe ;-)
I meant, going from O(n^3) to 2xO(n^2). Grah.
...in order to understand it.
Whenever you see a triple-nested for-loop, it is obvious that an increase by one in any of the three dimensions (in any of the controlling variables) will multiply the number of loops that need to be evaluated, and that probably splitting the loop into two loops with double-nesting only, even if there is a bit of increased complexity in it. Hence, he might be able to do some optimization without formally stating that he reduced from O(n) to 2×O(n).
The O() notation is not overstated, of course, it is fundamental to understand. But it is easy to understand without the mathematical formalism underneath. Of course, understanding and applying it are two different things, and being able to see the full picture with the required level of detail is often helped by academic in-depth analysis.
At my university, we have over 40 HP LaserJet printers. About half of them are networked 1000 models (1020, 1015, 1050, 1300 IIRC). I have them all configured as Postscript printers at my Samba server, so I can freely just interchange their IPs in case I have to shuffle them around. And yes, sometimes they are slow (I'll try setting them as PCL printers, that's a good tip and we are a mostly uniform HP-shop anyway), but they all understand proper Postscript.
Now that would be revolutionary!
Oh, wait...
One thing often forgotten when talking about greener technologies is that even if it would not cost you, it would still cost us. Several alternatives have appeared over the years which seem cheaper on a purely monetary (number-of-dollars-spent), but have ended up being worse for the environment (i.e. natural depletion for a scarce or highly toxic component in the pre-processing, or higher costs of properly disposing of a component after its useful life is over), and fortunately are usually ruled out before it is too late.
I have recently read interesting studies about public perception on water sustainability, particularly in the El Salvador society. People are aware of the costs of water, and are (at least, apparently) willing to pay for its consumption -- But defend the right to spend it if they are charged for it. Do you want to swipe the street with running water? As long as you pay for it, it should be allowed. That's the wrong mindset: Resources cost far more than just the money you are charged for them. Common, shared resources should be of guaranteed sustainability, and the State should prohibit one person, no matter how wealthy, to spend over their fair share of any given resource.
In this case, what would be the real difference between this design patent and a trademark? I recognize the link between "I'm feeling lucky" and Google. If the patent is required to carry this phrase, how is it different than just getting a trademark on the phrase?