Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:This is NOT a matter of trademark violation (Score 2) 237

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 Re: The basest, vilest (Score 3, Insightful) 965

It absolutely was tongue in cheek. Trump deftly took the embarrassing story about the hacked DNC e-mails, blew another day's worth of life into it, and used it as a touchstone to circle back and remind everyone about that OTHER famous e-mail server. He did this by taking the EEEEEVIL boogeyman of THE RUSSIANS! which the DNC tried to use to deflect away from the *contents* of the hacked e-mails, and made it all about Hillary again, when yesterday it was about Wasserman-Schultz. Of course, those 30,000 e-mails he is referencing are the ones that were supposed to be about yoga pants and Chelsea's weddings plans. So if they are really a matter of national security and we don't want the Russkies to see them, why were they deleted...? "Thank you for playing, Mrs. Clinton."

It's brilliant political jiu-jitsu. The thing is, I get the impression he or his team doesn't stay up late and plan it out this way, it's just some kind of natural squirrely viciousness he possesses.

Comment This is NOT a matter of trademark violation (Score 1) 237

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.

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 103

I have the front panel of the VAX 11/780 used to render that scene hanging on my wall, but I got to Pixar after that project. This year and last I've contributed some designs that will fly on a FEMA satellite, and a long time ago did a little work to support the Biosciences mission on the shuttle.

Comment Re:"What Difference Does It Make?!?!?!" (Score 1) 689

You're wrong. The hacker knows that every one of those hacked e-mails could be replicated somewhere else, on a device, downloaded to a laptop, whatever. The very moment a DNC staffer demonstrates that the text of just one e-mail was tampered with, the credibility of the whole cache would be discredited. The hacker dare not move one semi-colon, and he knows that.

Comment Re:"What Difference Does It Make?!?!?!" (Score 4, Insightful) 689

Not surprising. Dig into some of the emails and you will find discussions among DNC staffers about various articles they have received from journalists for approval before they are submitted to their editors! The media is complicit and circling the wagons around their own.

Comment They Have Forged The Sword That Will Kill Them (Score 5, Interesting) 192

There is no question that Netflix has to continue ramping up original production. Distribution is easy (sorry tech guys) but good content is hard. But "back in the day," there was a finite amount of space to fill with that original content. Once you reached X number of episodes for Y number of original series per annual season, you had obtained critical mass, and it was just up to the sales guys to make sure you were in as many homes and on as many platforms as you could be, and the programming guys to make sure the content was as good and innovative as budget allowed.

But Netflix pioneered "binge-watching." Exec-producing ten eps of Game of Thrones and dribbling them out no longer cuts it. We're now conditioned to watch 22 episodes of a new title as they all drop at once, gorging upon it all within a two week period lest we fall behind at the water cooler or in the online chatrooms.

Time (in a schedule grid) is no longer a constraint. Space (server/bandwidth capacity is cheap) is no longer a constraint. Only money is a limiting factor. How can they keep feeding that beast?

At one level, Netflix better hope that a lot of little competitors start popping up, because they will be able to sell them off-network rights to Daredevil and House of Cards and so subsidize their original production, much the same way HBO and video stores were first viewed as rivals to Hollywood, before Hollywood realized how much money it could make licensing to them.

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 103

I don't need to stand by the rotation theory. However, the 2.5 degrees that the Earth rotates are about equivalent to the downrange distance.

The first stage is going about 1/5 of the target LEO orbital velocity at separation. While you might well model the trajectory as a parabola over flat ground, given the lack of fuel I would expect that SpaceX puts a lot more care into their trajectory. So far I've failed to attract the attention of the person responsible for Flight Club, the most trusted modeling of SpaceX flights, but I'll message him directly.

Comment Re:They sound completely insane (Score 1) 328

Wait, are you serious? The Old Testament? No Christian sect of any size subscribes to that! It was all over-written by Jesus' teachings and the Mosaic antitheses from the New Testament. And yes, Muslims can choose to be moderate, but the point behind the stats quoted earlier is that a staggering (and growing) percentage are choosing the "let's stone the gays" flavor over the "religion of peace" flavor.

Comment Re:They sound completely insane (Score 1) 328

Hadd offences in Sharia law -- those for which there is no wiggle room for a judge in the assignment of penalty -- include amputation for thievery and stoning for adultery. If that's not evil, then at least admit is Medieval. Whether it is enacted upon Muslims or non-Muslims, who cares? It's downright barbaric.

Comment Re:They sound completely insane (Score 4, Informative) 328

Here's your link for the Islam numbers. Short version: The number of places under Sharia law is growing, and - more shocking -- the number of Muslims in western countries like the US and the UK who *wish* they were living under Sharia Law and would like to see their country change its legal system to one that was theology based is *growing.*

47 percent of all American Christians identify themselves as "Evangelical," although only 62 percent of those "Evangelicals" believe that abortion should be illegal in all states, so they're probably not what you would describe as a real Pokemon-fearing Evangelical. Link with stats

Look, I'm not here to do your homework for what is common sense to anyone who is not a dyed-in-the-wool Jihad apologist. Radical Islam is an existential threat to western civilization, and it's growing. Christianity is NOT an existential threat, and their numbers are diminishing. Get your head out of your ass and start doing some of the research yourself.

Slashdot Top Deals

Where there's a will, there's a relative.