Somewhat? They call MS barefaced liars, says they don't trust their own software, and furthermore states that their "Open Source is bad for bussiness" bashing, is nonsense (although to be fair they had singled out the GPL).
And that in the Wall Street Journal. Hmmm. What next?
The fight is not over music files formats. It's over streaming. Have you seen all those places that force you to download RealPlayer? Have you noticed that you cannot save the streaming audio/video that you receive?. That's not a bug, it's a feature. And the content providers use the RealPlayer format because of the (relative) security. MS offers now the same. And wants the market. And it's going to get it, of course. Nobody is going to switch to MP3 because then everybody could save the streaming audio/video, and distribute it again.
It does. But more than that seems shallow. The author jumps from premises to conclusions without any groundwork. Please, some examples of cultures of trust demolished by parasites. Please, some cause-effect data. Even some detailled argumentation would be welcome.
I give him credit for an interesting idea (i.e. the GPL has a "genetical" advantage on other free software licenses and will ultimately prevail), but I think that conclusion should be more grounded, not simply stated.
100% on, IMHO. I mean, how come that an attachment can dial a number?. Attachments in cellphones should have only access to the screen, and a "sandbox" memory, perhaps. They should have separate circuitry from the phone, for crying out loud!
Anybody knows if that's a bug, or a "feature"?
--
I hope they do not take it too far away
on
Star In A Jar
·
· Score: 2
I mean, after simulating a nova, they perhaps will try to simulate a black hole.
OOOOPS! "Doctor, I fear the rolling blackout hit us, the magnetic field wavered for a microsecond, and... well, to tell the truth, we are missing a black hole. There is a little hole in the ground, the size of a pinhead, and that's all"
"Well, son, don't panic and book me one ticket to the Space Station. I need a change of air, I've got the sinking feeling. You can say there is something gnawing at me, and at the Earth too."
Yups. It's sadly true. Schnif! Moreover, I have also studied and used COBOL, too, at times finding it rather nice (shocked gasps). The teacher had a rather criminal air, if I remember correctly, but that's beyond the point. Schnif!
Before BASIC, I had a brief exposure to direct hex programming in a testboard with two little hex displays and a cute numeric keyboard. I remember the big "feed" key, that loaded de memory. I had during years the hope, that that previous exposure would somewhat override or compensate my crippling BASIC experience. But not. BASIC has crippled the paths of my brain, torturing it into shapes that lead only to madness. What was left was REDEFINEd by the COBOL structure, into something utterly unusable.
But I know there is still hope for me! The Big Bill have told us "All you my followers, old BASIC programmers, step into Visual Basic with me, and I will lead you to C#, which will fulfill all your needs". I follow you, Bill, I follow...Hahahahahahahaha... (maniac laughter).
I rather think the whole debate is rather pointless. There is really anybody here, that thinks that the first language makes a difference?
I started with left-taught BASIC, then I moved to self-taught C, then Assembler, Lisp. I really cannot think anything would be so different if I had learnt C in the first place. Or Assember, or... well, perhaps Lisp would have made a difference, although I'm not sure in which direction:)
I have afterwards taught languajes, and there are mainly two types of people, those who have problems with programming, and those who not. No language will help the first group, who has problems to understand the most basic concepts, and no language is going to seriously hinder the second group.
If there's one technology that gets periodically hyped with news of the-next-big-thing, it's displays. I can remember new technologies that were going to take the world by storm, from 15 years ago. But my monitor and TV still look the same.
I'm sure some day some solution will be durable, fast, wide-angle, cheap and scalable. But I'm not holding my breath. Hey! Have any of you thought about a cannon of electrons, controlled by a magnetic field, hitting on a phosphor surface? If it could be made to work...
When people already have the computer and TV in the same room, which is a lot of people now, and they're watching television...this is the new thing that's not been done before and they'll want to do it.
Yes of course. I want something of what he's been taking. I know nobody that wants the PC on when they are watching TV. The d*** PC is noisy. I know of some people that like to have the TV on as they surf, but usually give almost no attention to it.
This kind of things are so far away of what I would consider a good bussiness plan, that sometimes I wonder if it's only me. I mean, these people have got money to back their loony ideas, and we are no longer in the anything-goes era, rather the other way around.
As a rule, I would consider a bad sign that they have to give away the hardware, so as to create a market. If the idea is so good, why they think nobody is going to pay a dime for it? And if nobody is ready to pay for it, why are they going to connect it at all, even less to use it?
But well, perhaps I'm wrong this time, I've been wrong before. But, also as a rule, you have to start with a perceived need, and then develop a product or idea. But lately I see more and more of "let's press this wonderful idea on the not-so-interested public, they don't even know they have this need". Ok, enough of it. Wake me up the next time somebody invents a videophone, or a micropayment system.
My experience is with kids of 11 or 12, but who had already shown a particular interest in computers, so they were rather motivated. I don't know if my experience will relate well with yours. In any case, I give you my "learnings" from that period (you learn a lot when you teach).
First. Keep it a hands-on experience. Borrow or steal computers, if neccesary. No new boxen are neccesary, anything that can process a language and make graphics is enough. (Graphics are important, kids love to draw). If you absoultely cannot do that, your task is much more difficult. Ah! Of course the language better interpreted.
Second. Forget the Internet. You will get only dissipation and noise. It's like teaching kids to watch TV. You can "teach" about the Internet, but don't let the little pests surf, or you are doomed. If you think it's important reserve it for last day before holidays or something like that.
Third. Keep it a hands-on experience. (Did I said that?). Bring hardware to class, open the hardware up and show the innards. Explain what is what and make sure all can have a look, touch the pieces, plug unplug a card, the works.
Fourth. Revise your basic knowledge of computing. You will find yourself confronted with all kind of simple questions difficult to answer simply. Like "What's the internet?", "What's the meaning of this MHz thing?", etc.
Fifth. Keep it simple. Life is complex, and computers too, but if you see that all the kids think that the WWW and Internet are the same thing, think very hard about how to explain the difference so that can be understood. Or even if it's worth it. Better say "We will speak about that next day" and think about a simple way of explaining it, like "E-mail is Internet, but not WWW". I remember myself saying many times "...er, but well, don't worry about it, that's not so important" to a wood of very open, very at-a-loss eyes.
You will find, if your class remotely resembles mine, a lot of difference between the most computer-savvy and the rest. The young hackers are going to be bored to death at times and will always interrupt you with corrections, or enthusiastic remarks. I have found no solution for it. If you have computers, throw'em one and challenge'em to do something, a program or something like that. That will keep them silent for a while.
Kids love doing things much more than to be explained things. A bit of background, of course, but then a little of programming so they can experiment.
If you have never teached, some general advices. Be very relaxed, kids detect nervousness before you know it. Sometimes the dinamics of the group will bypass you. Try to keep the control, but never show doubt. A bit of open noisy debate can let a little steam off, at times. That depends very much on the enviroment, so be sure to ask some old hands in the school about the usual problems in that environment, and the best strategies to overcome them. Follow their advice.
And last, if you have never teached, you are probably going to find it a very trying experience. You will probably have a couple of bad days at the beginning. It's a very stressing job. Don't be afraid of asking for help to other teachers, and specially at first, have a very clear script (with times and so) written, so you can look at it and know "what-next". And don't be a perfectionist (that relates with "keep-it-simple rule). You are not going to make so big a difference in the life of most of those kids, but you can make a small difference with some, and a very big with one or two.
Well, lots of luck, and don't be too afraid for what I just told. Teaching can be a very rewarding experience.:)
What does it mean, to convince the government to require the computer industry to adopt such a standard?. How should such a standard be forced on the industry? And, where precisely should such a standard be adopted? In DVDs? CD-ROMs? CDRs? In hard disks? In monitors? Video cards? Audio cards? Communication devices? Buses? All of the above?
It should be all of the above to have some kind of sense, and that's preposterous. IMHO, that is just a move from a company to "jump in the train" of content protection, and have a ride. If the goverment fails for that, splendid. Who is going to provide those completely useless devices but Thomson? And perhaps they will fall for it, with all the hoopla about piracy. It never hurts to try.
Doesn't look to me like a very serious proposition. Even the contents industry seems rather underwhelmed.
MS has got big plans for us. That we knew already. We are slowly getting a picture, but XP was not designed overnight. These plans come from long ago, and probably we will find out that there are still lots of surprises to come.
But the general idea is clear. Every time I stop seeing me with my own eyes, and look at myself through MS eyes, I see myself like a fat cow, only waiting to be milked away of her last drop of... money.
I have only one thing to say, and it's that if we (hackers, other computer companies, government, general public) let them get away with it, well, we will deserve to pay MS along till end of time. The strategy is clearly written, nobody is fooled, and alternative ways can be developed. If they are not, it's a proof that MS is a de-facto-standard-creating-machine, and all the rest, only a loud bickering lot of noise.
Because if they don't have it, it's kind of absurd. You are changing direct advertising revenues for... what? Nothing really, they will advertise in other places. So you are just damaging your own bottom line.
The only way to understand it, is to think in a political way. In this way of thinking advertising is like "supporting", and you cannot support your competitors. But that is simply soft-thinking. A company is not a political party, although that is often forgot in the testosterone-filled fights for supremacy. You are not here for supremacy, you are here to make money. and they way to make money is keeping your clients happy. And from the moment a competitor wants to buy something from you (advertising time), he becomes a client. It's so simple.
Nobody is going to leave you (as a provider) due to some ad, even if seen in you network. They are going to leave you if somebody offers them a better deal. Concentrate on offering the better deal, all else is losing energy and money.
Tolkien's theory of evil? Well, orcs are, our heroes aren't, and that about sums it up.
What about Gollum? What about the concept, pervasive in the book, of good to be found in the innermost of even the most evil of creatures? What about the parallel concept of all the "good ones", being corruptable? And about that being true specially of the highest of them, being the lower ones (read the hobbits), less prone to corruption as they are not so worried about power and riches, because they enjoy thouroughly their lives? And about the many paths that corruption may take, masquerading itself at first as "neccesary steps against a bigger evil" (read censorship, martial laws...)?
Has he read the books? Has he understood them?
You do not need to look up the word "literary snob" in the dictionary now, you have been presented with a (presumably) living exemplar. A literary snob, after all is said and done is, sadly, really only a troll. I mean in the geek sense of the term, not the Tolkien sense. He will always seek the new slant about something, not caring if it's remotely consistent or interesting, but only that is provoking. He will never consider they own feelings about something, only how is that going to look from the outside. Nothing popular can be good. If Shakespeare were to prove now too popular, he would say that no book in which characters say things like "Out, you mad-headed ape!" (Henry IV) can be more than a lightweight work. Well, I've ranted enough. I must remember... not to feed the trolls.
I also discovered alot of new independent bands that I never heard of. I'm not quite sure how I found these new artists, since you have to search for a song to download it, but I did.
The process for finding a new band that you never heard of was simple, in the late Napster. You find some stuff of a band you already know and like. As you make your search you find that some user own a lot of songs from that band/artist. You browse that user, and oh! surprise! he has a lot of other music you like and some music you had never heard of. As it's only reasonable to think that he has a taste somewhat like yours, you download something from those bands. Not surprisingly, you find many things you like.
I, speaking from my own experience, have learnt to know a lot of new music. Music that you never hear in your local radio/tv: Kiroro (Japonese), Teoman (Turk), Ismael Serrano (Spanish), Kortatu (sing in Spanish, don't know origin), Candan Erçetin (Turk), Herbert Grönemeier (German... yes, German), Julien Clerk (French), Mafalda Arnauth (Portuguese), and many more. And I have an absolutely delicious song that I do not know who composed or sang, because the name is japanese, chinese or korean translated to ASCII, full of funny signs. The user that hosted that song disappeared and was never to be found again. But that songs reminds me that there is still music to discover.
And BTW, I have bought some CD's from those artists. Not for me, I don't buy music anymore, but for gifts. So those artist are better off than if I hadn't got to know them in the first place.
"Fluorescent lights are everywhere," he says. "The infrastructure is already in place."
Well, I hate to point out the obvious, but there's almost no infraestructure in place. You still have to carry the data there. There is, IMHO, absolutely nothing that you can do with this idea, that you could not do better with a little infrared coded light source. I mean, what's the point? You save nothing, you have still to lie the cabling and the data infraestructure.
Only in the case of locating devices, like in an airport, could be argued that no data is neccesary, and the info could be hard coded in the emitting bulbs. But even there the savings are not too big, and are outweighted by the problems of maintenance that you find when using a device for two completely unrelated functions. Another type of locating device could be arguably better.
The technology to help handicapped persons to find their way around is here from a long time. The only thing needed is a common standard and a clear will, or rather the other way around. No amount of new gadgetry is going to change that basics needs.
The PTViewer license will be changed and be
more open. On Webpages using the applet, no
link to my own website is required. Also,
I do no longer plan to charge shareware fees
for PTMViewer, the extension to display
QTVR-files within PTViewer. It is free to use
like the rest of PTViewer. These changes take
effect immediately, and also apply to previous
versions.
Yeah, I bet he's now more interested in his software getting the widest possible use, more than in making the odd buck. Basically out of rage, would I say. That's just another example of why the people that still insist on "the Free/Open Software movement having no future because there's no money in it", are just too simplistic.
Wonderful humans are more complicated than any theory can explain. Money is a good motivator, I reckon. I'm fairly motivated by it myself. But is not the only one, and many times not the most powerful.
For more info, although not too much, check this or this.
It seems the problem is the Maori people are pissed from the possibility (or fact) of Lego trademarking these Maori names, so nobody (not even Maori people making traditional toys or something), could use them. That's a radically different way of reporting the issue, IMHO.
An analysis we've done, 80 percent of our customers are going to see the same or lesser prices, and 20 percent are going to see very small to somewhat larger increases.
The company Rollerblade, for example, did a pretty good job getting people to use the phrase "in-line skating" instead of "rollerblading" to protect its brand name. Xerox has also been vigilant in preventing publications from using the word "xerox" as a generic synonym for photocopy.
I just don't get it. It's bad for you company that everybody says "go rollerblading" or "xerox that" ? I would just say that's the best kind of publicity. Your trademark is in the dictionary, for crying out loud! Of course it's different with spam, nobody would like to be associated with that. But still I would say that adds rather than substracts from the value of your trademark. In the case of Xerox and Rollerblade , it's beyond my comprehension. (Oops, sorry, I forgot, a Trademark is an adjective so in the case of Xerox copiers and Rollerblade in-line-skates...)
...the watch measures the wearer's motion and body temperature
That's cool. The ultimate geek love tool. You just give it as a gift to the girl of your dreams, and make statistics relating sounds heard with body temperature. You can develop all sorts of interesting strategies, from that.
Slashdot Mirror
Somewhat? They call MS barefaced liars, says they don't trust their own software, and furthermore states that their "Open Source is bad for bussiness" bashing, is nonsense (although to be fair they had singled out the GPL).
And that in the Wall Street Journal. Hmmm. What next?
--
--
--
It does. But more than that seems shallow. The author jumps from premises to conclusions without any groundwork. Please, some examples of cultures of trust demolished by parasites. Please, some cause-effect data. Even some detailled argumentation would be welcome.
I give him credit for an interesting idea (i.e. the GPL has a "genetical" advantage on other free software licenses and will ultimately prevail), but I think that conclusion should be more grounded, not simply stated.
--
--
--
Anybody knows if that's a bug, or a "feature"?
--
OOOOPS! "Doctor, I fear the rolling blackout hit us, the magnetic field wavered for a microsecond, and... well, to tell the truth, we are missing a black hole. There is a little hole in the ground, the size of a pinhead, and that's all"
"Well, son, don't panic and book me one ticket to the Space Station. I need a change of air, I've got the sinking feeling. You can say there is something gnawing at me, and at the Earth too."
--
Before BASIC, I had a brief exposure to direct hex programming in a testboard with two little hex displays and a cute numeric keyboard. I remember the big "feed" key, that loaded de memory. I had during years the hope, that that previous exposure would somewhat override or compensate my crippling BASIC experience. But not. BASIC has crippled the paths of my brain, torturing it into shapes that lead only to madness. What was left was REDEFINEd by the COBOL structure, into something utterly unusable.
But I know there is still hope for me! The Big Bill have told us "All you my followers, old BASIC programmers, step into Visual Basic with me, and I will lead you to C#, which will fulfill all your needs". I follow you, Bill, I follow...Hahahahahahahaha... (maniac laughter).
I started with left-taught BASIC, then I moved to self-taught C, then Assembler, Lisp. I really cannot think anything would be so different if I had learnt C in the first place. Or Assember, or... well, perhaps Lisp would have made a difference, although I'm not sure in which direction :)
I have afterwards taught languajes, and there are mainly two types of people, those who have problems with programming, and those who not. No language will help the first group, who has problems to understand the most basic concepts, and no language is going to seriously hinder the second group.
--
I'm sure some day some solution will be durable, fast, wide-angle, cheap and scalable. But I'm not holding my breath. Hey! Have any of you thought about a cannon of electrons, controlled by a magnetic field, hitting on a phosphor surface? If it could be made to work...
--
Yes of course. I want something of what he's been taking. I know nobody that wants the PC on when they are watching TV. The d*** PC is noisy. I know of some people that like to have the TV on as they surf, but usually give almost no attention to it.
This kind of things are so far away of what I would consider a good bussiness plan, that sometimes I wonder if it's only me. I mean, these people have got money to back their loony ideas, and we are no longer in the anything-goes era, rather the other way around.
As a rule, I would consider a bad sign that they have to give away the hardware, so as to create a market. If the idea is so good, why they think nobody is going to pay a dime for it? And if nobody is ready to pay for it, why are they going to connect it at all, even less to use it?
But well, perhaps I'm wrong this time, I've been wrong before. But, also as a rule, you have to start with a perceived need, and then develop a product or idea. But lately I see more and more of "let's press this wonderful idea on the not-so-interested public, they don't even know they have this need". Ok, enough of it. Wake me up the next time somebody invents a videophone, or a micropayment system.
--
First. Keep it a hands-on experience. Borrow or steal computers, if neccesary. No new boxen are neccesary, anything that can process a language and make graphics is enough. (Graphics are important, kids love to draw). If you absoultely cannot do that, your task is much more difficult. Ah! Of course the language better interpreted.
Second. Forget the Internet. You will get only dissipation and noise. It's like teaching kids to watch TV. You can "teach" about the Internet, but don't let the little pests surf, or you are doomed. If you think it's important reserve it for last day before holidays or something like that.
Third. Keep it a hands-on experience. (Did I said that?). Bring hardware to class, open the hardware up and show the innards. Explain what is what and make sure all can have a look, touch the pieces, plug unplug a card, the works.
Fourth. Revise your basic knowledge of computing. You will find yourself confronted with all kind of simple questions difficult to answer simply. Like "What's the internet?", "What's the meaning of this MHz thing?", etc.
Fifth. Keep it simple. Life is complex, and computers too, but if you see that all the kids think that the WWW and Internet are the same thing, think very hard about how to explain the difference so that can be understood. Or even if it's worth it. Better say "We will speak about that next day" and think about a simple way of explaining it, like "E-mail is Internet, but not WWW". I remember myself saying many times "...er, but well, don't worry about it, that's not so important" to a wood of very open, very at-a-loss eyes.
You will find, if your class remotely resembles mine, a lot of difference between the most computer-savvy and the rest. The young hackers are going to be bored to death at times and will always interrupt you with corrections, or enthusiastic remarks. I have found no solution for it. If you have computers, throw'em one and challenge'em to do something, a program or something like that. That will keep them silent for a while.
Kids love doing things much more than to be explained things. A bit of background, of course, but then a little of programming so they can experiment.
If you have never teached, some general advices. Be very relaxed, kids detect nervousness before you know it. Sometimes the dinamics of the group will bypass you. Try to keep the control, but never show doubt. A bit of open noisy debate can let a little steam off, at times. That depends very much on the enviroment, so be sure to ask some old hands in the school about the usual problems in that environment, and the best strategies to overcome them. Follow their advice.
And last, if you have never teached, you are probably going to find it a very trying experience. You will probably have a couple of bad days at the beginning. It's a very stressing job. Don't be afraid of asking for help to other teachers, and specially at first, have a very clear script (with times and so) written, so you can look at it and know "what-next". And don't be a perfectionist (that relates with "keep-it-simple rule). You are not going to make so big a difference in the life of most of those kids, but you can make a small difference with some, and a very big with one or two.
Well, lots of luck, and don't be too afraid for what I just told. Teaching can be a very rewarding experience. :)
--
It should be all of the above to have some kind of sense, and that's preposterous. IMHO, that is just a move from a company to "jump in the train" of content protection, and have a ride. If the goverment fails for that, splendid. Who is going to provide those completely useless devices but Thomson? And perhaps they will fall for it, with all the hoopla about piracy. It never hurts to try.
Doesn't look to me like a very serious proposition. Even the contents industry seems rather underwhelmed.
--
But the general idea is clear. Every time I stop seeing me with my own eyes, and look at myself through MS eyes, I see myself like a fat cow, only waiting to be milked away of her last drop of... money.
I have only one thing to say, and it's that if we (hackers, other computer companies, government, general public) let them get away with it, well, we will deserve to pay MS along till end of time. The strategy is clearly written, nobody is fooled, and alternative ways can be developed. If they are not, it's a proof that MS is a de-facto-standard-creating-machine, and all the rest, only a loud bickering lot of noise.
--
The only way to understand it, is to think in a political way. In this way of thinking advertising is like "supporting", and you cannot support your competitors. But that is simply soft-thinking. A company is not a political party, although that is often forgot in the testosterone-filled fights for supremacy. You are not here for supremacy, you are here to make money. and they way to make money is keeping your clients happy. And from the moment a competitor wants to buy something from you (advertising time), he becomes a client. It's so simple.
Nobody is going to leave you (as a provider) due to some ad, even if seen in you network. They are going to leave you if somebody offers them a better deal. Concentrate on offering the better deal, all else is losing energy and money.
--
What about Gollum? What about the concept, pervasive in the book, of good to be found in the innermost of even the most evil of creatures? What about the parallel concept of all the "good ones", being corruptable? And about that being true specially of the highest of them, being the lower ones (read the hobbits), less prone to corruption as they are not so worried about power and riches, because they enjoy thouroughly their lives? And about the many paths that corruption may take, masquerading itself at first as "neccesary steps against a bigger evil" (read censorship, martial laws...)?
Has he read the books? Has he understood them?
You do not need to look up the word "literary snob" in the dictionary now, you have been presented with a (presumably) living exemplar. A literary snob, after all is said and done is, sadly, really only a troll. I mean in the geek sense of the term, not the Tolkien sense. He will always seek the new slant about something, not caring if it's remotely consistent or interesting, but only that is provoking. He will never consider they own feelings about something, only how is that going to look from the outside. Nothing popular can be good. If Shakespeare were to prove now too popular, he would say that no book in which characters say things like "Out, you mad-headed ape!" (Henry IV) can be more than a lightweight work. Well, I've ranted enough. I must remember... not to feed the trolls.
The process for finding a new band that you never heard of was simple, in the late Napster. You find some stuff of a band you already know and like. As you make your search you find that some user own a lot of songs from that band/artist. You browse that user, and oh! surprise! he has a lot of other music you like and some music you had never heard of. As it's only reasonable to think that he has a taste somewhat like yours, you download something from those bands. Not surprisingly, you find many things you like.
I, speaking from my own experience, have learnt to know a lot of new music. Music that you never hear in your local radio/tv: Kiroro (Japonese), Teoman (Turk), Ismael Serrano (Spanish), Kortatu (sing in Spanish, don't know origin), Candan Erçetin (Turk), Herbert Grönemeier (German... yes, German), Julien Clerk (French), Mafalda Arnauth (Portuguese), and many more. And I have an absolutely delicious song that I do not know who composed or sang, because the name is japanese, chinese or korean translated to ASCII, full of funny signs. The user that hosted that song disappeared and was never to be found again. But that songs reminds me that there is still music to discover.
And BTW, I have bought some CD's from those artists. Not for me, I don't buy music anymore, but for gifts. So those artist are better off than if I hadn't got to know them in the first place.
--
Well, I hate to point out the obvious, but there's almost no infraestructure in place. You still have to carry the data there. There is, IMHO, absolutely nothing that you can do with this idea, that you could not do better with a little infrared coded light source. I mean, what's the point? You save nothing, you have still to lie the cabling and the data infraestructure.
Only in the case of locating devices, like in an airport, could be argued that no data is neccesary, and the info could be hard coded in the emitting bulbs. But even there the savings are not too big, and are outweighted by the problems of maintenance that you find when using a device for two completely unrelated functions. Another type of locating device could be arguably better.
The technology to help handicapped persons to find their way around is here from a long time. The only thing needed is a common standard and a clear will, or rather the other way around. No amount of new gadgetry is going to change that basics needs.
--
Wonderful humans are more complicated than any theory can explain. Money is a good motivator, I reckon. I'm fairly motivated by it myself. But is not the only one, and many times not the most powerful.
--
It seems the problem is the Maori people are pissed from the possibility (or fact) of Lego trademarking these Maori names, so nobody (not even Maori people making traditional toys or something), could use them. That's a radically different way of reporting the issue, IMHO.
Yeah, I bet they are... at first.
I just don't get it. It's bad for you company that everybody says "go rollerblading" or "xerox that" ? I would just say that's the best kind of publicity. Your trademark is in the dictionary, for crying out loud! Of course it's different with spam, nobody would like to be associated with that. But still I would say that adds rather than substracts from the value of your trademark. In the case of Xerox and Rollerblade , it's beyond my comprehension. (Oops, sorry, I forgot, a Trademark is an adjective so in the case of Xerox copiers and Rollerblade in-line-skates...)
That's cool. The ultimate geek love tool. You just give it as a gift to the girl of your dreams, and make statistics relating sounds heard with body temperature. You can develop all sorts of interesting strategies, from that.