Actually, the font used by Facebook is a customised (by designer and typographer Joe Kral) version of what appears to be Klavika.
If the German site have actually used Klavika in it's original form and not the customised version then they may look very similar, but aren't actually the same font, thus Facebook can't sue. If they HAVE used Facebook's own font (bought and paid for by Facebook and no doubt OWNED by them too), then they're in an actionable position.
In reality ALL fonts are copyrighted and it's up to the individual typehouse or, er, individual, to set the license terms for use (whether it's a free open source font, use for commercial work etc), just as all other creative works.
This is why Arial was developed. M$ didn't want to pay Adobe for the license to Helvetica (originally an ITC foundry font, which Adobe bought the rights to), so instead they modified it (slightly different character spacing, aka kerning, slightly different x-height, minor tweaks to the lower-case t and the capital R etc - just enough to declare it officially 'different') and didn't use the copyrighted 'Helvetica' name. Other type foundries have followed the same path. Bitstream for instance developed their own version and dubbed it Swiss (721 I think - there are many different sans fonts in the 'Swiss' family which are Bitstream versions of other fonts and grouped together under a numbering scheme), Monotype had their own (not 'Sans Serif' which was developed circa 1986 by Richard Ware*).
So copyright of fonts is viable. Although it's easy to get around. But claiming someone's use of an original font violates copyrights of another company who use a modified version of that font does not stand.
*Just want to point out, 'Sans Serif' is a vastly different family to Helvetica and more closely akin to Futura or Avenir. A totally different character shape. Low x-height, very rounded character shapes, almost monoline stroke widths.
... and which ISP do you work for exactly? My shill sense is tingling!
I've not yet seen one shred of hard evidence to back up ISP's claims that streaming Flash video services (like the iPlayer) or P2P is sucking up all their bandwidth. Conversely we've seen one ISP recently release data showing it's been no more than about 5% of their capacity at it's highest (and we don't even know if that was sustained or a short spike!). ISP's are just trying to rip us all off - in the EU this is called price-fixing and is illegal, so they're trying to find 'legal' justifications and scapegoats to divert everyone's attention from the truth. There's no way I'm bending over and getting f**ked in the ass by someone who's name would suggest they're supposed to be providing a service! Broadband costs them (the ISP's) less (even at max capacity) to run than the old 56K dial-up services as they use a lot less power, it's about time they stopped trying to stiff us.
Actually, nuclear produces about 75% as much CO2 as a coal or gas fired power station if you take into account EVERYTHING, such as the build, fuel enrichment, fuel transportation, waste storage etc etc etc. On top of that, we've no solution yet as to what to reallly do with that high level (or even low level) radioactive 'spent' material, and we're stuck with a byproduct with 100,000 year half life... nuclear's the PAST if we want to be serious about generating electricity sustainably.
Yes, except for those who plagiarised the work of others. I count Bill Gates amongst these with his rip-off of MacOS. Some people still contest that Apple just took their ideas from Xerox - well, yes they did, but with the notable difference that they BOUGHT the rights to the software (GUI) that Xerox had shelved and in fact they also employed the Xerox staff who'd built that GUI/OS to work on the original Lisa/Mac System. Mr Gates just did a wholesale rip-off and got away with it. I know, I know, he'd already done well getting lucky by selling MSDOS to IBM prior to that (before he'd even written the OS) which some would see as a shrewd business move, but it could be argued was actually fraud (it's a common tactic of conmen to sell something to a mark that doesn't actually exist). Interesting way to start a monopolistic business venture - with a grand crime!;)
Are you kidding? RFID's are simple to implant. Go to any veterinary centre in the UK and you can have an RFID implanted in your dog in seconds. Likewise, you can read the RFID of anyone/anything within a 10 metre (give or take a few metres) radius, so it's a piece of piss to nick someone else's ID details, stick them on a black RFID and carry that with you - voila, ID theft made super-easy!!!
...because if you're going to be planning to commit some kind of 'terror' act, you're not going to be traceable by your oyster card. In fact, you're more likely just to pay cash at the ticket machines and be untraceable. I don't have anything to hide, but I won't use oyster - or own a customer loyalty card, or pay with debit/credit card when I can just pay cash. If it's not your own government spying on you, it's marketing companies working for corporations!
The Shah the US/UK helped to reinstall through a covert operation of bribery and supply (Operation Ajax) designed to undermine support of the popular secularist movement that the country was making (nationalising Iran's oil at the expense of British Petroleum) was an illegitimate ruler imposed on the Iranian people at the expense of the established democratically elected government of Mohammed Mosaddeq who could trace HIS lineage back to the elections - and surely that's how democracy is supposed to work... so for anyone who still believes that their country (US or UK especially) has a divine right to remove any democratically elected official who doesn't work for THEIR interests (or at least the interests of their corporations), then beware the precedent you have set, because the same tactic may be used against your own countries in the future. There is one rule for all, or you will find that you reap what you sow.
Hmmm... so by bouncing off military property, the photons that make it into a lens and onto a CCD belong to the military also? Just interested as the 'images' are in fact only a representation of reality!!! Could this lead to a whole new semantic argument about property rights? hehe
US military bases are not as secure as they should be
Apart from US military bases housed in UK military bases - let's not forget how hardcore their security was at Greenham Common - a bunch of middle-aged women CND campaigners climbing over the fence often being treated as a serious security breach.
heh... they should just have driven up to the front gates with a big camera on the roof of the car and they'd have got right up to the nukes!;)
...and the interesting thing about Guantanamo is that the 'agreement' between the Cuban and US governments over the US occupation of part of sovereign Cuban territory states that the US only have to leave when 'both parties want it'. So what's the chance of that ever happening?
I mean, the US was paranoid beyond belief at the thought of soviet nukes based on Cuba (despite the fact that the US is now encircling Russia in the former soviet Eastern European states with anti missile systems potentially leading to a new arms race and cold war - no, there's no hypocrisy here!). But imagine how paranoid the US would have been if the boot was on the other foot and Cuba occupied part of the US mainland indefinitely?
Let's also not forget that the US companies who lost assets in Cuba didn't strictly have any rights to those assets. They were part of agreements between the former US-supported dictatorship and those companies affected and I think Castro did the right thing. He threw out all previous corrupt agreements, took back what rightfully belonged to the Cuban people FOR the Cuban people and started with a clean slate. Perhaps it should be a lesson to companies that it doesn't always pay to invest in corrupt and dictatorial regimes.
Also note that most people who support the embargo against Cuba are the same ones who cite Cuba's harsh financial situation as being a reason to oppose Castro. They don't seem to see any kind of link between a 4 decade trade and financial blockade of a tiny nation and it's inability to develop much fiscally. I mean, it's not rocket science is it?
Anyone who truly has the interests of the Cuban people at heart (and aren't just 'commie-haters' for the sake of it... most of those guys haven't a clue what the ideals of Communism are anyway and constantly confuse them with fascism, not helped by fascists of Stalin or Pol Pot's ilk) would surely welcome a change of policy as the current one obviously doesn't work. Why not try lifting the embargo - see how that affects the financial situation in Cuba, then see how that affects the aspirations and future direction the population decides to take... whatever they decide, that's democracy in action.
That's because you don't NEED to tab between buttons when you have global shortcuts for certain standard functions (cmd-. for Cancel), Return/Enter for default gadget, D or Cmd-D for 'Don't Save', N or Cmd-N for 'No' etc etc etc.
Don't blame your own shortcomings on the OS;p
Actually - this is a good point. These are well known shortcuts to anyone who's been using a Mac for a while, but most newbies (anyone switching in the last 15 years is a newbie in my book - hehe) don't find them, because they're not documented AFAIK - at least not by Apple. Because of this, it's one of the more common sorts of FUD I see bandied around about OS X, that it's mouse-centric.
There are actually very few occasions where you have to reach for the mouse - most things can be done purely with the keyboard, and for those things that don't appear to be possible with the keyboard may well be utilised by adjusting settings in Universal Access and Keyboard System Prefs, including setting up your own global and application level kbd shortcuts.
Oh, and if you think you have to use the mouse to open menus, think again. Try hitting Ctrl-F2. That'll highlight the Apple menu (Esc to exit menu highlighting), then either cursors to navigate or start typing menu name and it'll jump to it, and same within menu items. Hit return to select highlighted item.
There are many undocumented shortcuts. Hitting Option-{special key} (where {special key} is one of the media keys such as volume/brightness/expose etc) will open that particular function's System Pref Pane. And then, of course, you could always opt out of the GUI altogether if you really are that hardcore and live your life in the Terminal... heh! So there you go... hope it proves useful:D
...has anyone else noticed that Vista Sensei, once teamed up with Office Master, lost all his spellchecking abilities?
Here:
After finding Office Master he asked for help with continuing the battle against evil doers around the world. They joined forces and now together they bind to create an unstoppable FOURCE - ready to fight for all who need they're help.
surely that should be "...ready to fight for all who need THEIR help"?
Aaaah... relax parents, you can be safe in the knowledge that your kids are in good hands learning the deficiencies they need to write articles for the literacy-challenged web
Didn't anyone at Microsoft think to READ this before it was put online? hahahahahaaaaahahahahaaaaaaaa!
I think the term 'same same' originally came from Hong Kong (1800's era?) where it was part of what became known as 'Pijjin English' (Chinese merchants dealing with the English in the colony). A way of saying 'the same as that' or some such. I think I read it in a Lonely Planet guide once, but I could be wrong.
Hmmm... er... OK... so, if I'm right, when you said:
Nope, I'm not "implying" anything. I said what I meant. Apple has a very limited software library. They probably released their dev tools because they are desperate for SOMEBODY to be able to write software
You WERE implying something. And you didn't actually mean what you said, and also accept that Apple DOESN'T have a very limited software library, and the reason they released their dev tools had nothing to do with the large numbers of people already writing software - so pretty much all of that was FUD rather than exaggeration n'est ce pas?
That's because Apple's crack is pure grade. Microsoft's is low grade - cut with some really poorly made 'phet and laced with a bit o' strychnine to give you that 'WOW' factor. The trouble is, low grade gear is gonna f**k you up, whilst Apple's will let you overdose and be happy;)
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the font used by Facebook is a customised (by designer and typographer Joe Kral) version of what appears to be Klavika. If the German site have actually used Klavika in it's original form and not the customised version then they may look very similar, but aren't actually the same font, thus Facebook can't sue. If they HAVE used Facebook's own font (bought and paid for by Facebook and no doubt OWNED by them too), then they're in an actionable position. In reality ALL fonts are copyrighted and it's up to the individual typehouse or, er, individual, to set the license terms for use (whether it's a free open source font, use for commercial work etc), just as all other creative works. This is why Arial was developed. M$ didn't want to pay Adobe for the license to Helvetica (originally an ITC foundry font, which Adobe bought the rights to), so instead they modified it (slightly different character spacing, aka kerning, slightly different x-height, minor tweaks to the lower-case t and the capital R etc - just enough to declare it officially 'different') and didn't use the copyrighted 'Helvetica' name. Other type foundries have followed the same path. Bitstream for instance developed their own version and dubbed it Swiss (721 I think - there are many different sans fonts in the 'Swiss' family which are Bitstream versions of other fonts and grouped together under a numbering scheme), Monotype had their own (not 'Sans Serif' which was developed circa 1986 by Richard Ware*). So copyright of fonts is viable. Although it's easy to get around. But claiming someone's use of an original font violates copyrights of another company who use a modified version of that font does not stand. *Just want to point out, 'Sans Serif' is a vastly different family to Helvetica and more closely akin to Futura or Avenir. A totally different character shape. Low x-height, very rounded character shapes, almost monoline stroke widths.
... and which ISP do you work for exactly? My shill sense is tingling! I've not yet seen one shred of hard evidence to back up ISP's claims that streaming Flash video services (like the iPlayer) or P2P is sucking up all their bandwidth. Conversely we've seen one ISP recently release data showing it's been no more than about 5% of their capacity at it's highest (and we don't even know if that was sustained or a short spike!). ISP's are just trying to rip us all off - in the EU this is called price-fixing and is illegal, so they're trying to find 'legal' justifications and scapegoats to divert everyone's attention from the truth. There's no way I'm bending over and getting f**ked in the ass by someone who's name would suggest they're supposed to be providing a service! Broadband costs them (the ISP's) less (even at max capacity) to run than the old 56K dial-up services as they use a lot less power, it's about time they stopped trying to stiff us.
Actually, nuclear produces about 75% as much CO2 as a coal or gas fired power station if you take into account EVERYTHING, such as the build, fuel enrichment, fuel transportation, waste storage etc etc etc. On top of that, we've no solution yet as to what to reallly do with that high level (or even low level) radioactive 'spent' material, and we're stuck with a byproduct with 100,000 year half life... nuclear's the PAST if we want to be serious about generating electricity sustainably.
Soylent Green is Heston!
Yes, except for those who plagiarised the work of others. I count Bill Gates amongst these with his rip-off of MacOS. Some people still contest that Apple just took their ideas from Xerox - well, yes they did, but with the notable difference that they BOUGHT the rights to the software (GUI) that Xerox had shelved and in fact they also employed the Xerox staff who'd built that GUI/OS to work on the original Lisa/Mac System. Mr Gates just did a wholesale rip-off and got away with it. I know, I know, he'd already done well getting lucky by selling MSDOS to IBM prior to that (before he'd even written the OS) which some would see as a shrewd business move, but it could be argued was actually fraud (it's a common tactic of conmen to sell something to a mark that doesn't actually exist). Interesting way to start a monopolistic business venture - with a grand crime! ;)
"black RFID" = BLANK RFID ;)
Are you kidding? RFID's are simple to implant. Go to any veterinary centre in the UK and you can have an RFID implanted in your dog in seconds. Likewise, you can read the RFID of anyone/anything within a 10 metre (give or take a few metres) radius, so it's a piece of piss to nick someone else's ID details, stick them on a black RFID and carry that with you - voila, ID theft made super-easy!!!
...because if you're going to be planning to commit some kind of 'terror' act, you're not going to be traceable by your oyster card. In fact, you're more likely just to pay cash at the ticket machines and be untraceable. I don't have anything to hide, but I won't use oyster - or own a customer loyalty card, or pay with debit/credit card when I can just pay cash. If it's not your own government spying on you, it's marketing companies working for corporations!
...just to show how old this design is, all the measurements are in inches. I mean, who uses inches anymore? hehe ;P
Once again, it seems people just try to rewrite history, merely spewing fascist crap repeated by rightists with an agenda...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état
The Shah the US/UK helped to reinstall through a covert operation of bribery and supply (Operation Ajax) designed to undermine support of the popular secularist movement that the country was making (nationalising Iran's oil at the expense of British Petroleum) was an illegitimate ruler imposed on the Iranian people at the expense of the established democratically elected government of Mohammed Mosaddeq who could trace HIS lineage back to the elections - and surely that's how democracy is supposed to work... so for anyone who still believes that their country (US or UK especially) has a divine right to remove any democratically elected official who doesn't work for THEIR interests (or at least the interests of their corporations), then beware the precedent you have set, because the same tactic may be used against your own countries in the future. There is one rule for all, or you will find that you reap what you sow.
You should do... Google are at least documenting how some of your hard earned tax dollars are being spent by DHS! ;)
Hmmm... so by bouncing off military property, the photons that make it into a lens and onto a CCD belong to the military also? Just interested as the 'images' are in fact only a representation of reality!!! Could this lead to a whole new semantic argument about property rights? hehe
Apart from US military bases housed in UK military bases - let's not forget how hardcore their security was at Greenham Common - a bunch of middle-aged women CND campaigners climbing over the fence often being treated as a serious security breach.
heh... they should just have driven up to the front gates with a big camera on the roof of the car and they'd have got right up to the nukes! ;)
...and the interesting thing about Guantanamo is that the 'agreement' between the Cuban and US governments over the US occupation of part of sovereign Cuban territory states that the US only have to leave when 'both parties want it'. So what's the chance of that ever happening? I mean, the US was paranoid beyond belief at the thought of soviet nukes based on Cuba (despite the fact that the US is now encircling Russia in the former soviet Eastern European states with anti missile systems potentially leading to a new arms race and cold war - no, there's no hypocrisy here!). But imagine how paranoid the US would have been if the boot was on the other foot and Cuba occupied part of the US mainland indefinitely? Let's also not forget that the US companies who lost assets in Cuba didn't strictly have any rights to those assets. They were part of agreements between the former US-supported dictatorship and those companies affected and I think Castro did the right thing. He threw out all previous corrupt agreements, took back what rightfully belonged to the Cuban people FOR the Cuban people and started with a clean slate. Perhaps it should be a lesson to companies that it doesn't always pay to invest in corrupt and dictatorial regimes. Also note that most people who support the embargo against Cuba are the same ones who cite Cuba's harsh financial situation as being a reason to oppose Castro. They don't seem to see any kind of link between a 4 decade trade and financial blockade of a tiny nation and it's inability to develop much fiscally. I mean, it's not rocket science is it? Anyone who truly has the interests of the Cuban people at heart (and aren't just 'commie-haters' for the sake of it... most of those guys haven't a clue what the ideals of Communism are anyway and constantly confuse them with fascism, not helped by fascists of Stalin or Pol Pot's ilk) would surely welcome a change of policy as the current one obviously doesn't work. Why not try lifting the embargo - see how that affects the financial situation in Cuba, then see how that affects the aspirations and future direction the population decides to take... whatever they decide, that's democracy in action.
Shouldn't that be 'asymmetrical'? tsk tsk... the state of our modern education system eh? ;)
Safari on Windows? Is that the same... and is that why it's so fast?
Don't blame your own shortcomings on the OS ;p
Actually - this is a good point. These are well known shortcuts to anyone who's been using a Mac for a while, but most newbies (anyone switching in the last 15 years is a newbie in my book - hehe) don't find them, because they're not documented AFAIK - at least not by Apple. Because of this, it's one of the more common sorts of FUD I see bandied around about OS X, that it's mouse-centric.
There are actually very few occasions where you have to reach for the mouse - most things can be done purely with the keyboard, and for those things that don't appear to be possible with the keyboard may well be utilised by adjusting settings in Universal Access and Keyboard System Prefs, including setting up your own global and application level kbd shortcuts.
Oh, and if you think you have to use the mouse to open menus, think again. Try hitting Ctrl-F2. That'll highlight the Apple menu (Esc to exit menu highlighting), then either cursors to navigate or start typing menu name and it'll jump to it, and same within menu items. Hit return to select highlighted item.
There are many undocumented shortcuts. Hitting Option-{special key} (where {special key} is one of the media keys such as volume/brightness/expose etc) will open that particular function's System Pref Pane. And then, of course, you could always opt out of the GUI altogether if you really are that hardcore and live your life in the Terminal... heh! So there you go... hope it proves useful :D
Quelle surprise!
er... it's "SCORCHIO!!!" isn't it? :D
...has anyone else noticed that Vista Sensei, once teamed up with Office Master, lost all his spellchecking abilities?
Here:
surely that should be "...ready to fight for all who need THEIR help"?
Aaaah... relax parents, you can be safe in the knowledge that your kids are in good hands learning the deficiencies they need to write articles for the literacy-challenged web
Didn't anyone at Microsoft think to READ this before it was put online? hahahahahaaaaahahahahaaaaaaaa!
I think the term 'same same' originally came from Hong Kong (1800's era?) where it was part of what became known as 'Pijjin English' (Chinese merchants dealing with the English in the colony). A way of saying 'the same as that' or some such. I think I read it in a Lonely Planet guide once, but I could be wrong.
Never underestimate the power of the dark side of the Source.
;D
The Source is strong in this one.
I feel a great disturbance in the Source
etc etc etc!?
Oh... so they're for the expanding FEMALE coder market then?
Hmmm... er... OK... so, if I'm right, when you said:
You WERE implying something. And you didn't actually mean what you said, and also accept that Apple DOESN'T have a very limited software library, and the reason they released their dev tools had nothing to do with the large numbers of people already writing software - so pretty much all of that was FUD rather than exaggeration n'est ce pas?
hehe
That's because Apple's crack is pure grade. Microsoft's is low grade - cut with some really poorly made 'phet and laced with a bit o' strychnine to give you that 'WOW' factor. The trouble is, low grade gear is gonna f**k you up, whilst Apple's will let you overdose and be happy ;)