Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment More importantly (Score 5, Insightful) 478

Every vote for a third party is a threat to a major party's political power.

As long as it's not enough of a threat to swing an election, they don't care.

What it DOES do that's useful, though, is tell them:
  - Here's someone who cares enough to take the trouble to vote, but that (both of) you weren't able to attract to your candidate.
  - and THAT (the STATED position of the minor party) is the direction you have to change in order to attract this voter later.

Comment Re:Two words for ya (Score 1) 328

My own kids, I have a hard time understanding their lack of ethics and social mores. After all, the example I have given them over the years is consistent with how I would like them to behave in public. I get on them about it and I get some results (they are 21 and 18), but there are lots of others who don't get that criticism. I suppose that has a lot to do with it.

Comment Re:The basest, vilest (Score 1) 1005

The President can't "illegally fire" someone. That issue was settled back in the 1860s and 1870s with the impeachment of Johnson and subsequent court cases - that was essentially what his impeachment was all about, at least publicly advertised as. The Executive retains the absolute right to purge Executive Branch personnel.

Comment I don't think that's what he did. (Score 1) 1005

So you don't think the Republican candidate for the Presidency of the US inviting a foreign power, one that is at the best of times in a rather tense relationship with the United States, to hack into US systems just to gain dirt on the other party's nominee is reasonable?

It's obvious to a native speaker of English (who isn't astroturfing the Democrats' talking points) that Trump was NOT inviting the Russians to initiate a new crack on his opponent's servers.

He was ribbing his opponents, and keeping their lax security (and their "The Russians are aiding him!" attempt at distraction) in the public eye, by pointing out that the Russians probably ALREADY have the emails that Clinton's people "can't find", and inviting them to dig them out of their own archives and provide them to investigators and/or the press.

People claiming he is inviting new espionage don't just look foolish. They also play into his hands, by keeping the issue in the face of prospective voters.

But feel free to continue. B-)

Comment Re:This is NOT a matter of trademark violation (Score 2) 245

Not necessarily. Take a look at the relevant portion of the Lantham Act. It would have to fit one of the provisions therein. It might make a false suggestion of affiliation, but it's arguable.

15 U.S.C. 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden

(a) Civil action

(1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which

(A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or

(B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities,

shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.

Comment OK - 2 theater experiences recently (Score 2) 328

First: North Branch MN, outside the Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area, to the north about an hour. It's rural. Instant service at the counter. They ran the soda fountain behind the counter, which was in tune. The popcorn was great. Theater was clean. Floor not sticky. Movie was fun to watch with the 10 other people in the theater. Good sound and video.

Second: White Marsh, MD, within Baltimore County and about 10 minutes from the Baltimore Inner Harbor. Had to wait 12 minutes for tickets because of a line. No explanation for the line. Then, skipped the popcorn because there was a 20-25 min line for that. This particular theater has a rewards program, meaning that one of the popcorn lines is reserved for people who pay an extra fee. Came out a half hour into the picture (chick flick, wasn't for me, so I found the trip out more interesting than listening to the movie) and still waited 5 mins for popcorn. Stale. Got a drink too, but had to dispense it myself. Drink machines were all sticky and semi-functional - some of those new Coke machines that are supposed to be so great - but are always out of service for one reason or another. Once in the movie, floor was sticky. About 15 people in the theater this time, more or less. Other patrons had BO and were leaning so far back in their seats it was hitting my knees, so I had to move. People talking during the movie - seems to be an ethnic thing in Baltimore, talking over the movie. Unpleasant theater experience overall.

#2 is more like my other recent experiences than #1. Makes a great argument for home theater. Sorry, Cameron.

Comment This is NOT a matter of trademark violation (Score 1) 245

You violate a trademark if you mis-represent a good or service as that of the trademark holder. And it has to be in the same trademark category that they registered. Having a trademark does not grant ownership of a word, and does not prevent anyone else from using that word. Use of a trademark in reporting and normal discussion is not a violation.

Slashdot Top Deals

Backed up the system lately?

Working...