Clippy says, "It appears you're starting yet another GPL vs. BSD holy war discussion. Would You Like Help?"

* Yes, please link to one of the approximately 17,000 near-identical discussions of this nature we've already had on Slashdot over the years.

* No, I'd rather pointlessly go through the exact same longwinded to-ing and fro-ing and restatements of the same old facts purely to indulge my personal need, despite the fact I know the chances of any new insight coming out of the billionth tedious discussion of this long-established subject is next to nothing, despite the fact that those on both sides feel the need to repeat the same entrenched positions- which mostly come down to personal philosophy and not an incomplete understanding of the issues (which everyone knows full well by now) and will therefore be unlikely to change in the face of the discussion (not that this was the point anyway).

(Joking aside, I'm pretty sure the OP knows all this and is intentionally trolling; I'm also pretty sure the replying AC above isn't, which IMHO makes it worse).

I think they just want Apple to chip in- either that or they have a chip on their shoulder and they want to get their own back by chipping away at Apple's success.

In Scotland, we already have a solution to that.

I don't care whether they're "EXTRA BIG" or not, I hate ass fries.

From what I've read, the original version of the North American Escort (presumably the one referred to above) was *supposed* to be based on the 1980 third-generation European Escort, but in practice ended up having little in common with it beyond a vaguely similar shape.

(This was apparently also the case with the Chrysler Horizon; the Dodge Omni and Plymouth Horizon apparently shared little with their European counterpart).

Those must have been really badly fitting seatbelts if they hurt you there.

Er... you're better than me then. I've forgotten even the negligible amount of Japanese I ever learned, and I use Google Translate. :-/

(Given how mangled two-way translations to and from Japanese are, though, I wouldn't risk it for anything important!)

On the contrary, I suspect it's unlikely that Sharp would require the licensee to conduct all business (including distribution) through themselves; I doubt either party would find that workable.

I suppose it's possible in some cases that a licensee might have a legal subsidiary with (e.g.) "Sharp" in its name, but I'm pretty sure the stores know who they're buying from anyway, and that doesn't appear to be the case here:-

Guessing it says something like "'Sharp' trademark used under license by Cheap Generic OEM Telly Distributors of Butt***k, Illinois."

Of course, some might argue that's irrelevant anyway; Sharp, by licensing their name, have given their blessing to what's being done with it, whether the customers like that or not.

I'd have said you should try Slashdot Japan instead, but it's no longer known by that name. (#)

Never mind, they've got a fantastic story on "How did the boob disappear from the terrestrial TV in Japan" which informs us that

Good to know, I'd been wondering that myself.

(#) Apparently it's still owned by OSDN, which sold the main Slashdot site several years ago- maybe they no longer have the rights to the name?

Depends- some were apparently made by Sharp, others by Casio.

As far as I'm aware, that quote ("The capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them") was always attributed to Lenin, not the Chinese, although even that is apparently open to question:-

Doesn't look particularly hyperbolic to me. Looks like a reasonable- if sceptical- conclusion, given the evidence. Honestly, you can disagree with it, but it doesn't seem overly "hyperbolic" given Apple's power over their curated app store.

What's the point you're allegedly making here? That such things are a "Mom's basement dweller" problem?

It's 2017. We're long past the "Internet is for nerds era". We're even long past the point where we have to point out that this is no longer the case... every man and his dog, and "Mom" herself has an Internet-connected smartphone these days. This appears to be a scam targeted at these less tech-literate users.

You're suggesting it's not a problem that one of the largest smartphone manufacturers doesn't appear to be doing enough to stop obvious scams that it should be in their power to police- within their walled-garden app store (as OP suggests, this is allegedly the whole point)?

This is barely even a "first world problem" any more. iPhones may arguably still be first world luxuries, but lower-end Android smartphones and the like are being pushed in developing countries, and such issues are no longer solely the concern of rich nerds with their playthings.

So, yeah. What was your point? Or was it just a bit of disingenuous shaming combined with the barely-veiled "basement nerd" cliche in order to shut down the argument without actually saying what was wrong with it?

Patronise me all you like- I'm well aware that calling out people on what they are (even if they are that thing) doesn't work in politics- but I'm not a politician, and not trying to be one. I'm discussing my personal response to anyone in that position.

That only applies if you chose not to vote for that reason, and I'm willing to be that it doesn't apply to the vast majority of the 27% who didn't vote. If it had been more than a tiny percentage, we'd have heard about it.

That's my personal opinion, and yes I can. Those who chose not to participate are still free to bleat about the consequences of something they were eligible to change but didn't, but I don't have to respect or listen to their far-too-late regret. The "STFU" is essentially shorthand for this.

I agree that the referendum was badly designed, but there is no major evidence of a protest "no vote" movement, and thus no prospect that non-votes would have been taken that way.

Given that, I think it's fair to assume that the vast majority of non-votes were *not* for that reason.

Really? I wouldn't even credit them with that. May has said repeatedly that "no deal is better than a bad deal" and made quite clear she's prepared to walk with nothing more than WTO terms. This is presented as a negotiating tactic, but in truth it's obvious arrogance from someone who- along with her hard-Brexiteering colleagues and other Little Englanders- thinks that Britain still has the power, influence and position it had in the days of Empire; something that was already mostly in the past when it joined the EU in the early 1970s.

Someone who thinks that they *will* be able to demand what they want, and even if they don't will get away with it anyway thanks to their "special relationship" with the United States and supposed connections with the Commonwealth, i.e. the former empire. As this article says:-

And the salient part:-

Regarding your second option:-

...you might begin to understand why (as a Scot in favour of independence) I'm not even considering entertaining the possibility of playing along with the UK electoral and political system that- from my point of view- is fundamentally broken, does not- and cannot- reflect the difference in political opinion between Scotland and England (and Wales) that has been growing since the Thatcher years but is now at breaking point.

We currently have 56 of 59(!) seats held by the SNP, yet are ultimately governed by the Conservative party that has just 1 seat in Scotland, but won due to voters in England and Wales.

We voted 62 to 38% to remain within the EU, yet are being dragged out because voters in England and Wales wanted to leave, as part of a campaign that started as a sop to the Tory party's Euro-sceptic right wing- primarily in South-East England- and consistently revolved around them, using the future of the UK as nothing more than a political football for their internal squabbles.

To add insult to injury, Scotland's position within the EU post-independence had been a central plank of the scaremongering "Better Together" campaign during the independence referendum. I'm surprised that the likes of Alistair Darling still have the cheek to show their faces when we saw how that turned out.

So- England and Wales heading in a hard right UKIP-like direction (UKIP themselves are only in decline because the Tories have mostly taken up that position for themselves and become- as you say "UKIP lite") while Scotland is completely different.

Do I want to remain tied to an elephant that clearly doesn't want to go the same way I do? No.