You kid, but my partner has fat fingers and constantly complains about not being able to use a pointed pen stylus on his Nexus S. Maybe i'll get him a galaxy note 2 for Christmas as it's both capacitive and has a nice (non-fluffy-ball) stylus.
That's why the WHO's own statistics list the "Palestinians" as the 8th most obese in the world? Come on now. The Arab Muslims of Egyptian, Jordian, and Syrian descent who live in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are in no way starving. There are good reasons for almost everything that is kept out of Gaza. Take cement for example. I often hear complaints that cement and certain other construction materials are not allowed. The reason for that is that if they were allowed, they would never make it to the people anyway. Hamas would take all of it to build bunkers with which to hide in and tunnels with which to smuggle rockets in. Similar reasons exist for the checkpoints in the West Bank and guess what? They work. The blockade in Gaza has stopped rockets being nearly the problem they were when there was none and the checkpoints and walls in the West Bank have almost completely stopped suicide bombings.
"Pure Google" Nexus devices also get updated for good long while. My partner is running official JB on his Nexus S and that device is a good few years old. (I on the other hand had to root and install CM10 on my GS1 variant to get JB). I do agree Apple is good about updates, though. I have a spare 3GS i use for iOS games and i'm able to upgrade to iOS6 even though the device is several generations behind. Apple and Google seem to support their devices legitimately as long as the hardware will support it (and sometimes even too far, as I don't think the iPad 1, with it's extremely limited ram, should have ever gotten iOS5).
Not just the carriers. Phone manufacturers do it too. According to samsung my GS1 based phone which is currently running JB CM10 is incapable of running JB. Last official update for my phone was 2.2. Yet the Nexus S with identical internals got the update. Samsung wants me to buy a GS2 or GS3.
Can text pop out of the screen and hurt you? Can it force you to pick up a gun and shoot somebody (convincing is another matter, as that requires your consent to the suggestion and you are free to disagree)? The truth is you're afraid to let people make up their own minds and bear the consequences because you think them unable, unlike yourself, to make competent decisions. The way you seem to see things, people are hapless robots with no free will, helpless to follow the words of others, therefore words should be restricted. You completely throw personal responsibility out the window.
Would free speech and anonymity everywhere increase violence? Well. We basically have that right now and other than reactionary idiots, I see nobody blaming the internet for an increase in crime (has it even increased)? Even if it did, if that's the price that has to be paid for liberty, then so be it. You may think 4chan is a toilet spreading around dangerous ideas irresponsibly, and perhaps there is some truth to that, but it's up to the individual to make that decision on their own, not you.
The only thing that ever happens in a society with censorship is that whatever laws are passed by the government that in theory sound like a good thing are only ever applied selectively. This is why i'm betting you would ban 4chan before you ever considered doing away with religious books, which are are thousands of times more dangerous. After all, people are helpless but to follow the dictates of their holy book. The book says "kill the X" and the followers do it... yet this is somehow permitted. Maybe you can explain that to me? Why i'm allowed to read that and make the decision for myself to do it or not, and why you would forbid me from reading more recent yet similar directives to kill on the internet... or even simply things that make you feel uncomfortable?
You should watch the movie "Beer Wars". It gives a fascinating look at how and why the US beer situation is now as bad as it is (a lot of it has to do with the system established to control alcohol distribution after prohibition ended). I fear something similar may very well happen one day with Marijuana.
A judge? Gotcha. Ever seen a judge make a bad decision? It's not like we don't hear about 'em day in and day out on this site. How about this instead. How about we let free people decide for themselves whether a comment is offensive or not and if it's offensive, they can choose not to read it.
And Tourette fucking Syndrome is spelled with two "t"s and an "ou". Fucking limey moron. Surprised with all the pointless "u"s you're always adding to words you didn't already know that.
It has nothing to do with race, rather the fear of upsetting the more religious Muslims. Please. There is a difference and it's not at all a subtle one. This is why people think organizations like the EDL are racist. Many of the members seem to have trouble distinguishing a religion from a race. I know it's sometimes difficult, but not all brown people, not even all arabs, are Muslims and not even all Muslims take their religion seriously (there are a whole bunch who are simply too scared to leave or otherwise simply don't give a fuck).
Really? I think we should round up all the commenters on the Daily Kos, not necessarily for re-education, but rather for a good ol-fashioned hippie beat-down. I think they're offensive and therefore by your logic I should be able to violate their liberty. Why not?
A genuine opinion can also be deliberately obnoxious. Who the fuck gets to choose which is which, anyway, and therein lies the problem. All restrictions on speech do is maintain the status quo and ensure that what is now considered "offensive" will always remain so.
I've had that happen before. It's annoying, but not a huge deal. You simply find a new host, transfer your files and databases, and point your domain to the new nameservers. I've also had somebody try a trademark claim on a domain of mine. You get to defend against that (and I did, and I won). I'd wager doing that is a lot easier than trying to get Apple to change a decision they've made becuase of their risk management policies. It's simply not in their interests to judge whether legal claims have merit. They can't just get any old intern to do that. They have to pay legal staff, which doesn't come cheap.
They have to go to court to get such an injunction and you do have an opportunity to defend yourself. A judge may grant a preliminary injunction but that's risky for the plaintiff and are not that easy to get.
A C&D is not a court order. I'm not obliged to comply. If I made, for example, a memory checker system tool for iOS and Ravensburger sent me a C&D I could tell them to go screw as they would have no case. Apple, on the other hand, doesn't give a fuck as to the threat's credibility and is only thinking about risk management... so there goes my app, or it gets renamed to something useless nobody will ever find.
I'm glad to hear that. I haven't been back to the states in a while. I'm surprised AT&T changed their policies. When i was there they were absolute dicks.
Depends on how you read the article. The article says "In total, there are thought to be more than 50 games this trademark will force to change names", but it also says "demanded Apple stop offering apps that have the word ‘memory’ in their title or as a keyword associated with an app". There is no indication this is limited to games alone, just geek.com's note that there are 50 games in the app store with "memory" in the title.
You're right that you don't need root, per se, but there are a lot of devices out there with sideloading disabled and you do then have to root. I'm not an expert, though. It's been a long time since I ran a stock rom. I'm running CM10 on a t959 Vibrant (US Galaxy S variant) and it's been a long time since I ran a stock rom.
To be fair it depends on whether or not you have a rooted device. Accomplishing this varies from frivolous to risking bricking your device. For most users, it means the app is gone.
And it's only a violation if you compete in the same field or there would be a potential for confusion. Nobody is going to confuse a "Memory" game with a "free memory" app, for example. I would think there are hundreds, if not thousands of apps in the app store that nobody would reasonably confuse with the (famous?) "Memory(tm)" game. I just checked in the app store. Take for example "battery memory system status monitor" would be affected. Would anybody ever confuse that with the "Memory(tm)" game, whatever that is?
Yes, but I very much doubt they have a history of defending the word "memory" in a product that does not compete with them, say... a "free memory" tool. If I had a game called memory, they might have a case. There are lots of other factors to consider depending on what your case might be. I am not a lawyer but I do have enough experience with trademark law to win a case, and i'm 99.9% sure that in this particular case, Ravensburger wouldn't stand a chance.
If I win I resubmit my app? Is that a serious response. What do I do in the mean time while i'm losing profit. The difference between your solution and a sane one is that in a sane world you're not automatically guilty and get to defend yourself in court before action is taken against you. The procedure may be the same (sort of), but the timing here is what matters.
You're right, but if I send Apple a "legal" demand written in crayon on toilet paper they'll probably comply. Most companies will instead of risk legal action.
Slashdot Mirror
You kid, but my partner has fat fingers and constantly complains about not being able to use a pointed pen stylus on his Nexus S. Maybe i'll get him a galaxy note 2 for Christmas as it's both capacitive and has a nice (non-fluffy-ball) stylus.
The greater the response, the greater the deterrence.
That's why the WHO's own statistics list the "Palestinians" as the 8th most obese in the world? Come on now. The Arab Muslims of Egyptian, Jordian, and Syrian descent who live in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza are in no way starving. There are good reasons for almost everything that is kept out of Gaza. Take cement for example. I often hear complaints that cement and certain other construction materials are not allowed. The reason for that is that if they were allowed, they would never make it to the people anyway. Hamas would take all of it to build bunkers with which to hide in and tunnels with which to smuggle rockets in. Similar reasons exist for the checkpoints in the West Bank and guess what? They work. The blockade in Gaza has stopped rockets being nearly the problem they were when there was none and the checkpoints and walls in the West Bank have almost completely stopped suicide bombings.
Yeah, but it's not a top-down view. I agree it shouldn't matter, but it probably does.
Yeah. Carriers and manufacturers suck, but if you buy a Nexus device, you're set for a good few years.
"Pure Google" Nexus devices also get updated for good long while. My partner is running official JB on his Nexus S and that device is a good few years old. (I on the other hand had to root and install CM10 on my GS1 variant to get JB). I do agree Apple is good about updates, though. I have a spare 3GS i use for iOS games and i'm able to upgrade to iOS6 even though the device is several generations behind. Apple and Google seem to support their devices legitimately as long as the hardware will support it (and sometimes even too far, as I don't think the iPad 1, with it's extremely limited ram, should have ever gotten iOS5).
Not just the carriers. Phone manufacturers do it too. According to samsung my GS1 based phone which is currently running JB CM10 is incapable of running JB. Last official update for my phone was 2.2. Yet the Nexus S with identical internals got the update. Samsung wants me to buy a GS2 or GS3.
Can text pop out of the screen and hurt you? Can it force you to pick up a gun and shoot somebody (convincing is another matter, as that requires your consent to the suggestion and you are free to disagree)? The truth is you're afraid to let people make up their own minds and bear the consequences because you think them unable, unlike yourself, to make competent decisions. The way you seem to see things, people are hapless robots with no free will, helpless to follow the words of others, therefore words should be restricted. You completely throw personal responsibility out the window.
Would free speech and anonymity everywhere increase violence? Well. We basically have that right now and other than reactionary idiots, I see nobody blaming the internet for an increase in crime (has it even increased)? Even if it did, if that's the price that has to be paid for liberty, then so be it. You may think 4chan is a toilet spreading around dangerous ideas irresponsibly, and perhaps there is some truth to that, but it's up to the individual to make that decision on their own, not you.
The only thing that ever happens in a society with censorship is that whatever laws are passed by the government that in theory sound like a good thing are only ever applied selectively. This is why i'm betting you would ban 4chan before you ever considered doing away with religious books, which are are thousands of times more dangerous. After all, people are helpless but to follow the dictates of their holy book. The book says "kill the X" and the followers do it... yet this is somehow permitted. Maybe you can explain that to me? Why i'm allowed to read that and make the decision for myself to do it or not, and why you would forbid me from reading more recent yet similar directives to kill on the internet... or even simply things that make you feel uncomfortable?
You should watch the movie "Beer Wars". It gives a fascinating look at how and why the US beer situation is now as bad as it is (a lot of it has to do with the system established to control alcohol distribution after prohibition ended). I fear something similar may very well happen one day with Marijuana.
You don't think the same folks who will try to regulate speech in meatspace would try and do the same online?
A judge? Gotcha. Ever seen a judge make a bad decision? It's not like we don't hear about 'em day in and day out on this site. How about this instead. How about we let free people decide for themselves whether a comment is offensive or not and if it's offensive, they can choose not to read it.
And Tourette fucking Syndrome is spelled with two "t"s and an "ou". Fucking limey moron. Surprised with all the pointless "u"s you're always adding to words you didn't already know that.
It has nothing to do with race, rather the fear of upsetting the more religious Muslims. Please. There is a difference and it's not at all a subtle one. This is why people think organizations like the EDL are racist. Many of the members seem to have trouble distinguishing a religion from a race. I know it's sometimes difficult, but not all brown people, not even all arabs, are Muslims and not even all Muslims take their religion seriously (there are a whole bunch who are simply too scared to leave or otherwise simply don't give a fuck).
Really? I think we should round up all the commenters on the Daily Kos, not necessarily for re-education, but rather for a good ol-fashioned hippie beat-down. I think they're offensive and therefore by your logic I should be able to violate their liberty. Why not?
A genuine opinion can also be deliberately obnoxious. Who the fuck gets to choose which is which, anyway, and therein lies the problem. All restrictions on speech do is maintain the status quo and ensure that what is now considered "offensive" will always remain so.
I've had that happen before. It's annoying, but not a huge deal. You simply find a new host, transfer your files and databases, and point your domain to the new nameservers. I've also had somebody try a trademark claim on a domain of mine. You get to defend against that (and I did, and I won). I'd wager doing that is a lot easier than trying to get Apple to change a decision they've made becuase of their risk management policies. It's simply not in their interests to judge whether legal claims have merit. They can't just get any old intern to do that. They have to pay legal staff, which doesn't come cheap.
They have to go to court to get such an injunction and you do have an opportunity to defend yourself. A judge may grant a preliminary injunction but that's risky for the plaintiff and are not that easy to get.
A C&D is not a court order. I'm not obliged to comply. If I made, for example, a memory checker system tool for iOS and Ravensburger sent me a C&D I could tell them to go screw as they would have no case. Apple, on the other hand, doesn't give a fuck as to the threat's credibility and is only thinking about risk management... so there goes my app, or it gets renamed to something useless nobody will ever find.
I'm glad to hear that. I haven't been back to the states in a while. I'm surprised AT&T changed their policies. When i was there they were absolute dicks.
Depends on how you read the article. The article says "In total, there are thought to be more than 50 games this trademark will force to change names", but it also says "demanded Apple stop offering apps that have the word ‘memory’ in their title or as a keyword associated with an app". There is no indication this is limited to games alone, just geek.com's note that there are 50 games in the app store with "memory" in the title.
You're right that you don't need root, per se, but there are a lot of devices out there with sideloading disabled and you do then have to root. I'm not an expert, though. It's been a long time since I ran a stock rom. I'm running CM10 on a t959 Vibrant (US Galaxy S variant) and it's been a long time since I ran a stock rom.
To be fair it depends on whether or not you have a rooted device. Accomplishing this varies from frivolous to risking bricking your device. For most users, it means the app is gone.
And it's only a violation if you compete in the same field or there would be a potential for confusion. Nobody is going to confuse a "Memory" game with a "free memory" app, for example. I would think there are hundreds, if not thousands of apps in the app store that nobody would reasonably confuse with the (famous?) "Memory(tm)" game. I just checked in the app store. Take for example "battery memory system status monitor" would be affected. Would anybody ever confuse that with the "Memory(tm)" game, whatever that is?
Yes, but I very much doubt they have a history of defending the word "memory" in a product that does not compete with them, say... a "free memory" tool. If I had a game called memory, they might have a case. There are lots of other factors to consider depending on what your case might be. I am not a lawyer but I do have enough experience with trademark law to win a case, and i'm 99.9% sure that in this particular case, Ravensburger wouldn't stand a chance.
If I win I resubmit my app? Is that a serious response. What do I do in the mean time while i'm losing profit. The difference between your solution and a sane one is that in a sane world you're not automatically guilty and get to defend yourself in court before action is taken against you. The procedure may be the same (sort of), but the timing here is what matters.
You're right, but if I send Apple a "legal" demand written in crayon on toilet paper they'll probably comply. Most companies will instead of risk legal action.