The date that they filed it doesn't mean anything - while it's pending, it isn't considered a registered trademark.
If it is registered,
Any party who believes it may be damaged by registration of the mark has thirty (30) days from the publication date to file either an opposition to registration or a request to extend the time to oppose. An opposition is similar to a proceeding in a federal court, but is held before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, a USPTO administrative tribunal. If no opposition is filed or if the opposition is unsuccessful, the application enters the next stage of the registration process. A Certificate of Registration will issue for applications based on use, or a Notice of Allowance will issue for intent-to-use applications.
They are probably more than happy to be getting accused of testing a missile, it means people aren't talking about the thing that really concerned them.
I would agree. Would you rather be accused of testing a missile on your own satellite, or be blamed by the entire US and laughed at by others for your satellite parts being stolen after most of it survives reentry?
While I remember to post - the differences are generally just described nowadays as different "hats". Black hat (crackers), white hat (security experts and the like, paid or charity), and gray hat (curiosity).
From the description you use that'd be more like being a "script kiddy" instead of a cracker. Cracking, from my understanding, is simply either performing a malicious act after having found the flaws.
There's a whole slew of terms that seem to have been lost as the term "hacker" has become mainstream (different types of crackers, specific roles, etc). Unfortunately, because of how mainstream this use has become, I doubt anything can be done to change this misnomer.
The number 1 question here is "Why is this computer with classified information connected to the Internet, anyway?". It's VERY easy to "physically modify to prevent running P2P" by simply disconnecting the ethernet cable.
If there is so much of an issue with P2P and such, why are the important systems not in a controlled network with no outside access? In such a case, I would assume it's easier to lose a flash drive with a bit of info, rather than someone physically break into a government controlled facility to steal the data. I understand this makes it more difficult to get data that you need in a timely fashion, but if it's meant to be so secret, then you SHOULD have to jump through hoops to get it.
The issue in this case is to patent a design for a system - something that makes sense to me. If you go ahead and design a great application and I troll the patent office looking for good ideas, who's to stop me from stealing your idea and using my massive resources to actually create what you couldn't, or faster than you could? The problem for this case isn't that it wasn't possible at the time, but rather it wasn't possible for that institution at the time.
How much code can you "touch", anyway? Software is something that is intangible by definition - just a set of instructions. In the software world, designs (if done so detailed) can transform directly into the product. Requirements and designs are, in fact, meant to describe how the product works, which fits pretty well what you're saying there.
But, if you want to get down to the specifics, a patent is to cover an invention, which is "an object, process, or technique". So, you can even patent processes or techniques for doing anything. Yes, this may seem to be flawed, and yes there are lots of issues with pre-existing technology, but that's how it works. The patent system does well for underdogs who need to protect their inventions, but unfortunately also does well for trolls.
How is this different from what we already have? I recently received my passport, and it states it has "electronic devices" inside of it, and to not bend it because of that. You still have the paper, but the electronic devices could be used where available.
Having an open algorithm is good, as non-disclosure isn't security, but the issue is allowing people to rank searches and such. Having that public is asking for people to abuse the system, and as noted before, a lof of malicious parties could seemingly legitimately rank their sites (porn sites, etc) higher, leading to ranking battles by bots. Of course, the issue of vandalism occurs with Wikipedia, however when people are looking to make money off of it they'll likely be more persistent.
So basically...they're asking for people to abuse the ranking system. To patrol something like this would require a company with resources like Google, and most likely the reason Google doesn't have such functionality. Just my two cents.
Afterwards, they're going to take all of the projects and throw them in the Blender - Open Source Smoothies for everyone! So that's what OSS really stands for...
From the website:
"At the end of July 2008 the game will be launched. The team members will get a great studio facility and housing in Amsterdam, all travel costs reimbursed, and a fee sufficient to cover all expenses during the period."
Obviously, this requires funding. The funding's coming from sponsors (see web site) and profits from the DVD sales. The DVD, as noted in the forums/site, will include all sorts of great documentation and information about what went on and stuff.
And from the forum:
"The plan is to have 6 people for 6 months in Amsterdam working full time on a game."
What about the machines that these IP addresses resolve to? Trojans would be very easy to defeat if all of them pointed to the one address that is the perpetrator. However, a lot of times these addresses are other "innocent" machines, like yours, that are infected and are just another go-between. It may just be that you never would see the perpetrator's IP address, and they're simply using backdoors on other networks.
Now, given the other machines are infected, you would indeed be a criminal yourself, as the victim of YOUR attacks would be wondering why the heck you're attacking them - a vicious cycle if they take the same route you do. However, finding these IPs and informing the administrators of a possible security breach might be more effective.
It wasn't a contradiction - in the game GLADoS states that instead of the normal test chamber, it's a test chamber for androids. After you finish the chamber, the idea is that the message from GLADoS was something automated after an android would finish it (and generally something amusing). I guess the leg/ankle supports would explain the character never taking damage or hurting at all from falling from such heights...
Of course it's wrong, and not "just business". In the United States, bribery is illegal. Being a US company, Microsoft has to abide by the laws of the US in its deals with other countries. Of course, the issue, in both government and business cases (which one could argue are the same) the issue is finding proof.
For some people the issue is that it's Microsoft, but the actual issue is the potential bribery - but why would the bribery go on after Mandriva was already bought by the country?
Correct, current civilian GPS devices only sample once per second. GPS readings aren't perfect, and can be skewed based on your environment. In addition, like you said, certain devices may modify the speed read from GPS before display and logging, as it can fluctuate even if you're going a steady speed.
As for #2, many police won't give a ticket unless you're six or nine miles over the limit, depending on the person. I've seen people pulled over and given a ticket (in MD) for going one mile per hour over the limit...
I got 10% off by buying through Steam before it came out, so I don't know what your quarrels with Steam are. I had the TF2 beta just like everyone else who bought the Orange Box for 10% off. I unlocked the Orange Box the very morning the game was released, and was able to play immediately. What's so wrong with this? Instead of paying the inflated, never-dropping prices of Best Buy, I can get it ahead of time for a discount by buying software from the people who spent their years of effort and money to develop it.
The issue here isn't with Steam, it's with how the company handled the problem. Even if Steam wasn't involved, using a CDKey system, keys would have been deactivated. Everyone bashing Steam needs to realize this (the majority of bashers probably don't even use it - I actually really like it).
To re-iterate what the real problem was: the *majority* of people (sure one or two may have legit complaints) affected tried to buy the game for a discounted price, had their games de-activated, can get a refund and buy it properly now. For the few people affected, I don't think this is that big of a deal - don't be so cheap on a company that's offering 5 very awesome games for the price of one, and one that even offered a discount beforehand.
I think that, more than anything, it confirms that consoles are more to the level of PCs. The idea behind releasing for both was to hit a larger audience, and provide a larger amount of potential players to fill up servers. More players = more players, if that makes any sense - people don't like playing on empty servers.
In any case, my argument for PC gaming has, and always will be, the modifiability of a PC compared to a console. When you buy a console you're usually stuck with the same box for 2 years or so until you have to buy a whole new one. While the same can be said about PCs (depending on your viewpoint), you usually can just upgrade memory/video card and have a more multi-purpose machine. I'm sure this could start a huge flame war, so I'm not going to babble any more. =)
Long story short: developers are getting better at being able to target multiple systems, and increase their target markets.
I agree. I store all of my documents on my system as ODF, because of the formatting changes that occasionally occur in Word docs.
However, when I need to send to anyone else, I usually just export to PDF, or DOC if necessary.
The next time you buy a CD or DVD, and you want to back it up, try calling the company that produced it and asking for a backup copy for the reasons above: you have the rights to one, but it's illegal for you to make one. Sure, they're laugh in your face, but if you bug the crap out of them you might just get some attention or even make them buckle to make you stop calling. I'm sure you could ask up the chain and eventually someone will get tired of it.
Just sounds like something amusing to try if you have free time and speakerphone while you play your game or watch the movie.
"The Linux graphical user interfaces - essentially, the way design elements like menus and toolbars are set up - run afoul of another 65, he claims"
Oh? So, shouldn't Microsoft be going after any software vendor that created applications with any of these design elements? It would seem like Microsoft is just responding to the rise of Linux popularity (especially with governments) and the failures of Vista. I just don't see them profiting from any of this.
If a lot of this material isn't licensed in the US (like most of the anime people download out there), why would Google have to comply? Sure stuff like Naruto has been licensed, but a lot of those sort of things are AMVS, which promote the anime more than anything, imo.
Was Google really legally required to remove these videos if they weren't licensed in the US, or were they simply doing a service?
Slashdot Mirror
The date that they filed it doesn't mean anything - while it's pending, it isn't considered a registered trademark.
If it is registered,
Any party who believes it may be damaged by registration of the mark has thirty (30) days from the publication date to file either an opposition to registration or a request to extend the time to oppose. An opposition is similar to a proceeding in a federal court, but is held before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, a USPTO administrative tribunal. If no opposition is filed or if the opposition is unsuccessful, the application enters the next stage of the registration process. A Certificate of Registration will issue for applications based on use, or a Notice of Allowance will issue for intent-to-use applications.
I would agree. Would you rather be accused of testing a missile on your own satellite, or be blamed by the entire US and laughed at by others for your satellite parts being stolen after most of it survives reentry?
While I remember to post - the differences are generally just described nowadays as different "hats". Black hat (crackers), white hat (security experts and the like, paid or charity), and gray hat (curiosity).
From the description you use that'd be more like being a "script kiddy" instead of a cracker. Cracking, from my understanding, is simply either performing a malicious act after having found the flaws.
There's a whole slew of terms that seem to have been lost as the term "hacker" has become mainstream (different types of crackers, specific roles, etc). Unfortunately, because of how mainstream this use has become, I doubt anything can be done to change this misnomer.
The number 1 question here is "Why is this computer with classified information connected to the Internet, anyway?". It's VERY easy to "physically modify to prevent running P2P" by simply disconnecting the ethernet cable.
If there is so much of an issue with P2P and such, why are the important systems not in a controlled network with no outside access? In such a case, I would assume it's easier to lose a flash drive with a bit of info, rather than someone physically break into a government controlled facility to steal the data. I understand this makes it more difficult to get data that you need in a timely fashion, but if it's meant to be so secret, then you SHOULD have to jump through hoops to get it.
The issue in this case is to patent a design for a system - something that makes sense to me. If you go ahead and design a great application and I troll the patent office looking for good ideas, who's to stop me from stealing your idea and using my massive resources to actually create what you couldn't, or faster than you could? The problem for this case isn't that it wasn't possible at the time, but rather it wasn't possible for that institution at the time.
How much code can you "touch", anyway? Software is something that is intangible by definition - just a set of instructions. In the software world, designs (if done so detailed) can transform directly into the product. Requirements and designs are, in fact, meant to describe how the product works, which fits pretty well what you're saying there.
But, if you want to get down to the specifics, a patent is to cover an invention, which is "an object, process, or technique". So, you can even patent processes or techniques for doing anything. Yes, this may seem to be flawed, and yes there are lots of issues with pre-existing technology, but that's how it works. The patent system does well for underdogs who need to protect their inventions, but unfortunately also does well for trolls.
How is this different from what we already have? I recently received my passport, and it states it has "electronic devices" inside of it, and to not bend it because of that. You still have the paper, but the electronic devices could be used where available.
Having an open algorithm is good, as non-disclosure isn't security, but the issue is allowing people to rank searches and such. Having that public is asking for people to abuse the system, and as noted before, a lof of malicious parties could seemingly legitimately rank their sites (porn sites, etc) higher, leading to ranking battles by bots. Of course, the issue of vandalism occurs with Wikipedia, however when people are looking to make money off of it they'll likely be more persistent.
So basically...they're asking for people to abuse the ranking system. To patrol something like this would require a company with resources like Google, and most likely the reason Google doesn't have such functionality. Just my two cents.
Afterwards, they're going to take all of the projects and throw them in the Blender - Open Source Smoothies for everyone! So that's what OSS really stands for...
From the website:
"At the end of July 2008 the game will be launched. The team members will get a great studio facility and housing in Amsterdam, all travel costs reimbursed, and a fee sufficient to cover all expenses during the period."
Obviously, this requires funding. The funding's coming from sponsors (see web site) and profits from the DVD sales. The DVD, as noted in the forums/site, will include all sorts of great documentation and information about what went on and stuff.
And from the forum:
"The plan is to have 6 people for 6 months in Amsterdam working full time on a game."
What about the machines that these IP addresses resolve to? Trojans would be very easy to defeat if all of them pointed to the one address that is the perpetrator. However, a lot of times these addresses are other "innocent" machines, like yours, that are infected and are just another go-between. It may just be that you never would see the perpetrator's IP address, and they're simply using backdoors on other networks.
Now, given the other machines are infected, you would indeed be a criminal yourself, as the victim of YOUR attacks would be wondering why the heck you're attacking them - a vicious cycle if they take the same route you do. However, finding these IPs and informing the administrators of a possible security breach might be more effective.
It wasn't a contradiction - in the game GLADoS states that instead of the normal test chamber, it's a test chamber for androids. After you finish the chamber, the idea is that the message from GLADoS was something automated after an android would finish it (and generally something amusing).
I guess the leg/ankle supports would explain the character never taking damage or hurting at all from falling from such heights...
Of course it's wrong, and not "just business". In the United States, bribery is illegal. Being a US company, Microsoft has to abide by the laws of the US in its deals with other countries. Of course, the issue, in both government and business cases (which one could argue are the same) the issue is finding proof.
For some people the issue is that it's Microsoft, but the actual issue is the potential bribery - but why would the bribery go on after Mandriva was already bought by the country?
Correct, current civilian GPS devices only sample once per second. GPS readings aren't perfect, and can be skewed based on your environment. In addition, like you said, certain devices may modify the speed read from GPS before display and logging, as it can fluctuate even if you're going a steady speed.
As for #2, many police won't give a ticket unless you're six or nine miles over the limit, depending on the person. I've seen people pulled over and given a ticket (in MD) for going one mile per hour over the limit...
I got 10% off by buying through Steam before it came out, so I don't know what your quarrels with Steam are. I had the TF2 beta just like everyone else who bought the Orange Box for 10% off. I unlocked the Orange Box the very morning the game was released, and was able to play immediately. What's so wrong with this? Instead of paying the inflated, never-dropping prices of Best Buy, I can get it ahead of time for a discount by buying software from the people who spent their years of effort and money to develop it.
The issue here isn't with Steam, it's with how the company handled the problem. Even if Steam wasn't involved, using a CDKey system, keys would have been deactivated. Everyone bashing Steam needs to realize this (the majority of bashers probably don't even use it - I actually really like it).
To re-iterate what the real problem was: the *majority* of people (sure one or two may have legit complaints) affected tried to buy the game for a discounted price, had their games de-activated, can get a refund and buy it properly now. For the few people affected, I don't think this is that big of a deal - don't be so cheap on a company that's offering 5 very awesome games for the price of one, and one that even offered a discount beforehand.
I think that, more than anything, it confirms that consoles are more to the level of PCs. The idea behind releasing for both was to hit a larger audience, and provide a larger amount of potential players to fill up servers. More players = more players, if that makes any sense - people don't like playing on empty servers.
In any case, my argument for PC gaming has, and always will be, the modifiability of a PC compared to a console. When you buy a console you're usually stuck with the same box for 2 years or so until you have to buy a whole new one. While the same can be said about PCs (depending on your viewpoint), you usually can just upgrade memory/video card and have a more multi-purpose machine. I'm sure this could start a huge flame war, so I'm not going to babble any more. =)
Long story short: developers are getting better at being able to target multiple systems, and increase their target markets.
I agree. I store all of my documents on my system as ODF, because of the formatting changes that occasionally occur in Word docs. However, when I need to send to anyone else, I usually just export to PDF, or DOC if necessary.
The next time you buy a CD or DVD, and you want to back it up, try calling the company that produced it and asking for a backup copy for the reasons above: you have the rights to one, but it's illegal for you to make one. Sure, they're laugh in your face, but if you bug the crap out of them you might just get some attention or even make them buckle to make you stop calling. I'm sure you could ask up the chain and eventually someone will get tired of it. Just sounds like something amusing to try if you have free time and speakerphone while you play your game or watch the movie.
"The Linux graphical user interfaces - essentially, the way design elements like menus and toolbars are set up - run afoul of another 65, he claims" Oh? So, shouldn't Microsoft be going after any software vendor that created applications with any of these design elements? It would seem like Microsoft is just responding to the rise of Linux popularity (especially with governments) and the failures of Vista. I just don't see them profiting from any of this.
If a lot of this material isn't licensed in the US (like most of the anime people download out there), why would Google have to comply? Sure stuff like Naruto has been licensed, but a lot of those sort of things are AMVS, which promote the anime more than anything, imo. Was Google really legally required to remove these videos if they weren't licensed in the US, or were they simply doing a service?