They're working on that. 0.5% of the US population is in prison and the rate is rising rapidly. Now that they don't have to bother with trials any more...
I say anyone who is not in absolute 100% shouldn't be able to drive in the name of safety.
Not good enough. What about people with slower than average reaction times? Too young (say, under 35) to have good judgement? To old (over 50, perhaps) to think fast? And worst of all are inexperienced drivers. No one should be allowed behind the wheel until they've logged at least 100 hours behind the wheel.
Bruce is absolutely right. Encourage people to write their passwords down. Tell them how to do so securely. Issue them little black books and tell them how to keep them secure.
There is a danger in creating a password system with two many requirements, because I know very few people who used that system who didn't have their password on a sticky note on their monitor.
Whereas they should have it in a little address book that they keep with their cash and credit cards. I mean that seriously. Use strong passwords, use a different password for every account, and write them down. Yes. I said that. Write them down. There is no other way to get ordinary people to use multiple strong passwords.
I don't think it matters if they offer different services.
It matters a great deal.
It would be the same as someone opening a seafood restaurant called Walleye-mart.
That might be grounds for a dilution claim depending on details since it would be being used to advertise a product. This guy, however, isn't selling anything.
Best Buy probably has a case against them, as the car and the logo bear a very similar aesthetic and it would be pretty difficult to argue that it was just a coincidence.
It isn't that easy. They must also convince the court that the public might be misled into believing that it is getting Best Buy's product when it is not. Their only alternative is to claim dilution which would require that it be used to advertise an unrelated product or be used in a way that would "tarnish" it by creating negative associations.
I think you're missing the point - that's exactly the kind of sensationalizing the far right has been so good at doing in recent years.
"Recent years"? Both left and right have been doing it since before the terms "left" and "right" were coined (But of course it is only "sensationalizing" when the other side does it. What your side does is unbiased reporting of the facts.)
> Because you get people who KNOW the material that they are covering.
After all, who could know it better? They made it up themselves! (or at least a friend of a friend of a friend did. But they know it's true: it confirms their preconceptions.)
Yes, some Indie reporters are reliable. Mostly, though, they are as bad as Fox.
Shrug. I could "sue" you for contradicting me. You'll cripple yourself if you refrain from doing anything that might, by any remote chance, get you sued.
> Don't think it can happen? I've experienced it (though not in the above > form, exactly).
In any case, being sued is not the same as being prosecuted.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course. Masses of it, all proving conclusively that they are amazingly effective.
> Second step: jail everyone!
They're working on that. 0.5% of the US population is in prison and the rate is rising rapidly. Now that they don't have to bother with trials any more...
Not good enough. What about people with slower than average reaction times? Too young (say, under 35) to have good judgement? To old (over 50, perhaps) to think fast? And worst of all are inexperienced drivers. No one should be allowed behind the wheel until they've logged at least 100 hours behind the wheel.
Bruce is absolutely right. Encourage people to write their passwords down. Tell them how to do so securely. Issue them little black books and tell them how to keep them secure.
Whereas they should have it in a little address book that they keep with their cash and credit cards. I mean that seriously. Use strong passwords, use a different password for every account, and write them down. Yes. I said that. Write them down. There is no other way to get ordinary people to use multiple strong passwords.
You've got the trigger-happy part right, anyway. Good? Not so much. Then there is the matter of the definition of national security...
How many of those were their real passowrds?`
Trademark is not copyright.
> I'm not sure you could rule out a claim of dillution.
Dilution seems to require either commercial use or tarnishment.
It matters a great deal.
That might be grounds for a dilution claim depending on details since it would be being used to advertise a product. This guy, however, isn't selling anything.
It isn't that easy. They must also convince the court that the public might be misled into believing that it is getting Best Buy's product when it is not. Their only alternative is to claim dilution which would require that it be used to advertise an unrelated product or be used in a way that would "tarnish" it by creating negative associations.
...when inflated with nitrogen.
> I have to wonder...
No you don't. You could look.
...if not their safety, when they post online.
So don't do it. Someone may find out that you exist.
Possession of a Title 17 1201(a)(2) "circumvention device" is not illegal in the USA. DMCA .
> By the time you find the problem, they're long gone.
That's why payment should not be authorized until the work has been inspected and signed off.
"Recent years"? Both left and right have been doing it since before the terms "left" and "right" were coined (But of course it is only "sensationalizing" when the other side does it. What your side does is unbiased reporting of the facts.)
> They don't start on page 1 [of a newspaper] and read through to the end.
Very few people ever did.
> He expects people to pay for his mind numbing biassed reporting?
That's the kind most people like.
> Nope. Don't think so.
Might just work if he makes it mind numbing biassed left-wing reporting (he's already got a lock on mind numbing biassed right-wing reporting).
> Because you get people who KNOW the material that they are covering.
After all, who could know it better? They made it up themselves! (or at least a friend of a friend of a friend did. But they know it's true: it confirms their preconceptions.)
Yes, some Indie reporters are reliable. Mostly, though, they are as bad as Fox.
> what we now have is packaged spin, nothing more.
That's all we ever had.
> Check out the youthful demographics Fox News attracts...
You assume that he isn't just a capable of cynically exploiting liberal political correctness as he is conservative political correctness.
Perhaps he will purchase the Huffington Post.
Not unless you hire editors who can make them politically correct. Hint: repackaging Fox News won't work.
> ...I can be sitting in the UAE...
If you are in the UAE then the UAE can do with you as it wills. What matters is what they might do to people outside the UAE
> Person sues you directly.
Shrug. I could "sue" you for contradicting me. You'll cripple yourself if you refrain from doing anything that might, by any remote chance, get you sued.
> Don't think it can happen? I've experienced it (though not in the above
> form, exactly).
In any case, being sued is not the same as being prosecuted.