Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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 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 Here are some suggestions (Score 1) 192

>"What you, Slashdot readers, think Netflix's next move will be? Or do you think the company will soon become just another name in its respective category?"

I don't know what it WILL do, but I know things it NEEDS to do.....

1) We are all sick of cable. Netflix needs to secure all programs they can with quality networks such as NatGeo, History, etc, and offer a micropayment plan- charge for what we want actually see. I would gladly pay $0.50/hr or more per hour of entertainment and have that money go to support what I like to watch. ZERO money from me going to ESPN, Golf channel, Goldfish channel, etc, etc.

2) They need a model to also allow downloads in a DVR-like mode. Things ready-to-watch with no sucking of prime-time bandwidth, and with smooth and instant trick play, whether there is an Internet connection at that time or not.

3) Lay off the gimmicks (4k, 3D, etc) and concentrate on content.

4) Searchable library from the website. It is stupid to try and hide what you have or don't have.

5) Never, ever try to introduce commercials or ANY forced content into your streaming or you will quickly alienate most of your customers in a way that could destroy your company very quickly.

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 palm vien (Score 1) 93

>"Iris scanning is increasingly being used for biometric identification because it's fast, accurate, and relies on a body part that's protected and doesn't change over time. "

Not really. It is a rather stupid biometric, especially when something exists that is far better in just about every way....

There is only one safer and practical biometric I know of- that is deep vein palm scan. That registration data cannot be readily abused. It can't be latently collected like DNA, fingerprints, and face recognition can (and possibly iris scans). You have to know you are registering/enrolling when it happens. You don't leave evidence of it all over the place. When you go to use it, you know you are using it every time. And on top of all that, it is accurate, fast, reliable, unchanging, live-sensing, and cheap. If you must participate in a biometric, this is the one you should insist on using.


But we also need to realize that IT IS NOT EVERYONE'S BUSINESS WHAT WE ALL DO, where we go, what we buy, who we talk with, WHO WE ARE. The first step in securing freedom is privacy and often means anonymity. When you are identified and tracked, you are losing your freedom, whether you realize it or not.

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

Well, Alastair, you should probably not get snotty and ad-hominem, unless you want me to comment on how a one-time sci-fi author and the Unix guy at Dish doesn't really have more authority than the random person one might find in the SpaceX group on Reddit.

It happens there are a few people over there who are rocketry professionals, have the math, and have followed SpaceX long enough. So, sure, their opinion can indeed be trusted.

So far, we have a suggestion from one of the lesser folks there that raising the apogee takes advantage of the Earth's rotation. We'll see if we get the attention of the right people.

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

It seems to be a common misconception that orbital mechanics somehow knows when you are in orbit and does not work otherwise. But that is as silly as saying that relativity only works near light speed. These things always work regardless of speed, it's just that their effects are macroscopic at greater speeds.

Comment Re:Everyone but North America (Score 1) 161

What is really needed is cable plans that allow selection of just the channels the person wants, or a Netflix that includes commercial-free programs from all the different channels and you can subscribe to what you want there, or have a micropayment system of paying for what you watch.

At that point the consumer gets what they want and companies are rewarded for what is actually being watched. It infuriates me that my money goes to companies like ESPN, BET, Discovery, etc when I have ZERO interest in their offerings.

But having a proprietary/unfriendly/unsupported separate streaming service for every content provider is no good solution. Who wants to pay 30 bills, try to find platform support for 30+ providers, or deal with all the different UI's for every "channel"? Yuck

Slashdot Top Deals

System checkpoint complete.