Perhaps someone who knows about trademark law can enlighten us:
Does Google have any leverage over these people?
If ABC News (or a private individual) wants to use the word "google" as a generic term, what if anything can google do about it?
I understand that if Lycos or Yahoo tried to use the trademark "google" to describe their search engines, that's actionable. But can Google (the company) do anything about google (the generic word meaning "to search on the internet"?
I think you should help your brother. As a Christian, I believe we are responsible for the welfare of others. Of course, lots of non-Christians feel the same way.
Here is how you help your brother: Loan him the $150 so that he doesn't become homeless. In return, you should demand the password to his WoW account. Said password to be changed by you at regular intervals, to ensure he doesn't have access to the account. You might also want to watch him uninstall WoW from his machine, and hold onto his install disk. Your brother can have the account and the disk back when he pays back the money he owes you.
None of these will absolutely prevent him from playing, but they make it more difficult.
Your brother has become a charity case, and it's incumbant on every human to be charitable. However, charity often comes with strings attached. When your brother earned his own money, paid his own rent, and paid his taxes, it wasn't your place to tell him how to live his life. Playing WoW every waking hour was his right as an adult. That's changed now. If you and your family are going to pay his bills, you can make some demands about playing less WoW and getting a job.
Microsoft doesn't yet have software to tie a photo library with Windows Live Local (Google does), but don't be surprised if it comes to life."
OK, I won't be surprised.
I also won't be surprised when slashdotters gush and fawn over Google's product, then go ape-shit over Microsoft "tying" a software product to Windows Live Local.
Can they produce gloves able to stand up to shark bites ?
How about gloves for butchers ?
Would they be cheaper to produce than the steel-ring gloves used today ?
What are you, some kind of hand model?
Can't you just use oven mitts or a hypobaric chamber like everyone else??
Intel had profits last year of almost $8 billion versus a market cap of $106 billion.
AMD had profits of about $370 million on a market cap of about $15 billion.
That means Intel is giving about three times the return on investment.
Oh, and their newest chip pretty much squashes everything on the market, including their own current "Extreme Edition" offerings.
AMD has no viable laptop chips, while the Core Duo has been out for months. Did I mention that laptops account for the majority of new computers purchased? And that they're far more profitable that desktops?
Microsoft has vast monopoly power that will allow it to gain monopolies in any emerging computing connected/related device.
That's the slashdot party line, but even your own examples show how laughable the idea is.
PDA's previously owned by Palm, will soon be a microsoft monopoly.
Even the most hateful of Microsoft bashers will admit that Microsoft never won the PDA market. Rather, Palm lost the PDA market by sitting on its ass for five years and releasing software riddled with bugs.
Good for Microsoft. Memo to Palm: You snooze, you lose.
Gaming. Sony faces the biggest threat ever and yet managed to make incredibly stupid moves that will make the move to microsoft gaming domination even faster.
I wouldn't count Nintendo out yet. The Wii's price point is intriguing.
That said, Sony is just Palm all over again. Sony had a gargantuan lead with the PS2 -- 75% market share or some such. Then they basically rolled over. The PS3 wanders onstage a full year after Xbox 360 (assuming no further delays), costing $600?? Who's going to buy that? By next Christmas, the 360 will cost $300 and have hundreds of games.
Why should Microsoft take heat for Sony being a bunch of idiots?
Media. Microsoft is agressively pusing it's DRM/codecs everywhere.
Yeah, that's what businesses do. Go figure.
I'll put it plainly: Movie studios won't accept Fairplay for movies, period. They've gotten burned too many times by software-only solutions. They are looking for a tamper-resistant, hardware-based alternative. So far Intel and Microsoft are the only companies stepping up to the plate.
Microsoft isn't winning the DRM fight because of its "monopoly powers" (the only monopoly in digital media right now is iTunes). It's winning because no one else is in the game. It's easy to win a race when you're the only one running.
In Firefox the search box defaults to Google, and that the pulldown menu of pre-entered options doesn't even include MSN Search, but Google seems to have been oddly quiet on that front for the many years prior to IE7 that Firefox has made this feature available.
Now you've done it. Cue hundreds of slashdot sheep to point out that "Microsoft is a convicted monopolist" and thus anything they do, anywhere, ever, is bad for consumers.
Just to save time, I'll summarize the typical MS-basher's point of view:
If Apple bundles a media player with MacOS, that's good for consumers. If Microsoft bundles a media player with Windows, that's bad for consumers. Consumers would be better off paying extra money for Windows Media Player. If European consumers have the option of free-media-player or no-media-player Windows and they choose the free player version, something is wrong with them.
If Apple uses their Operating System to pimp dotMac, that's good for consumers. If Microsoft uses their Operating System to pimp MSN, that's bad for consumers.
If Microsoft's OS has viruses and spyware, they are being irresponsible. It's outrageous that consumers have to pay companies like Symantec and McAfee to do Microsoft's work. If MS decides to offer their own anti-virus service, now suddenly they are abusing their monopoly power.
When Apple integrates things like video-conferencing into their OS, they are innovating. When Microsoft wants to do the exact same thing, they are stifling innovation. No one is really sure why this is true, but it's true.
When Microsoft used closed, undocumented file formats for its Office applications, that was evil. When Microsoft switched to open XML file fomats and asked to join the OpenDocument committee, they are "muscling in" on open source and planning to sabotage their efforts.
In summary: Anything Microsoft does is bad -- even if it's good when other companies do it. Anything Microsoft does is bad -- even if they were doing the exact opposite last year, and we said that was bad.
He calls upon other browser developers to take part in the discussion so that 'concrete standards in this area can be hammered out'.
A fully scalable, vector-based browsing experience would be nice.
Toss in support for animation, full-motion video, and client-side programming in something other than JavaScript, please. And 3D, while we've got the hood up.
The only way that war becomes "fair" is if both sides incur the same 'cost' of the war
FAIR, who the hell wants war to be fair?!?? Anyone actually going to war wants it to be as unfair, as brutal, and as lopsided as possible. War is not a fucking soccer match.
In fact, when facing a country such as the US or EU which has basic respect for the rules of war (eg, the Geneva Convention), a "fair" war pretty much maximizes the number of people killed.
Look what happenned in the Pacific during WW2. American, Commonwealth, and Japanese soldiers got fed into a meat grinder for 4 years because they were reasonably well-matched. Then the Americans got the ultimate weapon, and their absolute air superiority allowed them to use that weapon with impunity. That doesn't sound very fair, does it? No big surprise: the war ended about a week later. This saved the lives of not only countless American GIs, but millions upon millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians.
If they can be engineered inside living cells, they could measure a patient's metabolism and deliver just the right amount of drug at just the right spot, the researchers reckon.
I already have one of these.
It helps me to live, so I named it a "liver".
Heaven forbid we miss out on the opportunity to blow $30 or $40 billion a year supporting a manned lunar base, which gives us exactly nothing in return for our investment.
Let the Chinese bankrupt themselves doing it, if they care to. I'll wave up at them on cloudless nights.
I'd rather the US not blow my hard-earned tax dollars on this foolishness.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, this article has been misrouted. You meant to send it to my boss.
I'll print out a copy and show it to him.
My God. Are we sending video signals straight through thin air these days??? What exciting times we live in!
You, sir, have never stood for reelection.
Perhaps someone who knows about trademark law can enlighten us:
Does Google have any leverage over these people?
If ABC News (or a private individual) wants to use the word "google" as a generic term, what if anything can google do about it?
I understand that if Lycos or Yahoo tried to use the trademark "google" to describe their search engines, that's actionable. But can Google (the company) do anything about google (the generic word meaning "to search on the internet"?
The linked webpage contains a bunch of "techniques" which are mostly
"If we find a bug in this system call, PatchGuard will be worthless!"
along with a few
"This disables PatchGuard in the current beta build of Vista!"
Absolutely.
Ugly, lonely losers copulating with soulless machines would be much less depressing.
I think you should help your brother. As a Christian, I believe we are responsible for the welfare of others. Of course, lots of non-Christians feel the same way.
Here is how you help your brother: Loan him the $150 so that he doesn't become homeless. In return, you should demand the password to his WoW account. Said password to be changed by you at regular intervals, to ensure he doesn't have access to the account. You might also want to watch him uninstall WoW from his machine, and hold onto his install disk. Your brother can have the account and the disk back when he pays back the money he owes you.
None of these will absolutely prevent him from playing, but they make it more difficult.
Your brother has become a charity case, and it's incumbant on every human to be charitable. However, charity often comes with strings attached. When your brother earned his own money, paid his own rent, and paid his taxes, it wasn't your place to tell him how to live his life. Playing WoW every waking hour was his right as an adult. That's changed now. If you and your family are going to pay his bills, you can make some demands about playing less WoW and getting a job.
OK, I won't be surprised.
I also won't be surprised when slashdotters gush and fawn over Google's product, then go ape-shit over Microsoft "tying" a software product to Windows Live Local.
What are you, some kind of hand model?
Can't you just use oven mitts or a hypobaric chamber like everyone else??
Are you talking about dupes? Or the Inquirer?
What world are you talking about, precisely?
Intel had profits last year of almost $8 billion versus a market cap of $106 billion.
AMD had profits of about $370 million on a market cap of about $15 billion.
That means Intel is giving about three times the return on investment.
Oh, and their newest chip pretty much squashes everything on the market, including their own current "Extreme Edition" offerings.
AMD has no viable laptop chips, while the Core Duo has been out for months. Did I mention that laptops account for the majority of new computers purchased? And that they're far more profitable that desktops?
Venkman: You're not sleeping with it, are you?
That said, Sony is just Palm all over again. Sony had a gargantuan lead with the PS2 -- 75% market share or some such. Then they basically rolled over. The PS3 wanders onstage a full year after Xbox 360 (assuming no further delays), costing $600?? Who's going to buy that? By next Christmas, the 360 will cost $300 and have hundreds of games.
Why should Microsoft take heat for Sony being a bunch of idiots?
Yeah, that's what businesses do. Go figure.I'll put it plainly: Movie studios won't accept Fairplay for movies, period. They've gotten burned too many times by software-only solutions. They are looking for a tamper-resistant, hardware-based alternative. So far Intel and Microsoft are the only companies stepping up to the plate.
Microsoft isn't winning the DRM fight because of its "monopoly powers" (the only monopoly in digital media right now is iTunes). It's winning because no one else is in the game. It's easy to win a race when you're the only one running.
Just to save time, I'll summarize the typical MS-basher's point of view:
In summary: Anything Microsoft does is bad -- even if it's good when other companies do it. Anything Microsoft does is bad -- even if they were doing the exact opposite last year, and we said that was bad.
Toss in support for animation, full-motion video, and client-side programming in something other than JavaScript, please. And 3D, while we've got the hood up.
Let's call it XAML. Is that good with everyone?
Maybe you should buy some of these things. They aren't very expensive.
In fact, when facing a country such as the US or EU which has basic respect for the rules of war (eg, the Geneva Convention), a "fair" war pretty much maximizes the number of people killed.
Look what happenned in the Pacific during WW2. American, Commonwealth, and Japanese soldiers got fed into a meat grinder for 4 years because they were reasonably well-matched. Then the Americans got the ultimate weapon, and their absolute air superiority allowed them to use that weapon with impunity. That doesn't sound very fair, does it? No big surprise: the war ended about a week later. This saved the lives of not only countless American GIs, but millions upon millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians.
Please, ScuttleMonkey, just say no to RAS Syndrome!
Heaven forbid we miss out on the opportunity to blow $30 or $40 billion a year supporting a manned lunar base, which gives us exactly nothing in return for our investment.
Let the Chinese bankrupt themselves doing it, if they care to. I'll wave up at them on cloudless nights.
I'd rather the US not blow my hard-earned tax dollars on this foolishness.
No.. No, we should not land on the moon's poles or equator. Thank you.
Go figure.. Something about having to pay his workers and suppliers. Doesn't he know that Crown Victorias want to be free??