Normally TD is really good about showing the different marks and how there's no opportunity for confusion. This article did not include that.
Normally TD is really good about showing how one company's trade is different than the other's. Here they both talk about transportation but it's unlikely the olive-oil aussies will be going into space, launching an airline, or pretending they are real-blonde real-white-teeth 50-year old billionaires.
Normally TD does the research so when group B says "We agreed on all but one thing" we know what that one thing is so we can say "Mr. Branson's lawyers... how could you?" Yet, here... none of that.
More facts would be helpful to get a mass of support for the conclusions arrayed here...
You didn't use an 800 baud MODEM for accessing BBS's[sic].*
This doesn't give kickstarters a bad name. Kickstarters are not an investment. They're a gamble. If you win then you get a late product at a discount before it's available for retail. If you lose you get nothing. If you wait you can buy it retail -- with guarantees.
E * No telephone MODEMS manufactured ever did 800 baud.
He didn't use the Internet since the "1200 baud modems[sic] days". Not even a tiny bit.
The "Internet" has evolved many times but commercial access was available in 1993. Prior to that, if you were related to the NSFnet, its educational institutions, or the technology that made it run you could have accessed it as early as 1986.
In 1986 v32 was the standard (9600bps) and it would have been extremely rare to see someone using 1200 baud. 9600bps was exepsnsive. 4800 baud was the price point. 2400 baud was cheap. 1200 baud was obsolete. Nobody used that on "the Internet". Maybe CompuServe or Delphi or AOL.
Just adding some technical facts here. This pyramid scheme is unravelling, but not fast enough to keep the money out of this scammer's hands.
Ehud P.S. Mr. Cliffts: I intend this posting to be indicating that you are a liar, engage in defrauding those who put money in your hands and did not get a product and that you're incompetent as a lawyer. I live in Tucson Arizona. Come get some Arizona justice. I'll waive service if you serve me with a complaint that is neither materially deficient, misstates the law, has no US English grammar nor spelling mistakes, and is printed on 25lb paper.
Mike's* generally well-reasoned but let's stick to the facts.
This is a horrible ruling and if it were here in the US it would set a horrible precedent.
Ehud *Well I'm personally butthurt he turned down my offer to go do coffee or whatever for that offer they have in the techdirt store where you get a 30 minute face-to-face with him. I wasn't even going to bring a macaroni-picture for him to sign. However, the reason I originally expressed an interest in the meeting [which was unrequited and I cried for hours --maybe days] was because Mike puts things together. Anyone can analyze a ruling or write a story. It takes knowledge of the context to frame it in a way that expresses WHY and HOW it is important. Still... the story is not about Mike. It's about the judge's ruling. Right?
Often the test focuses on the specific solution to the problem, not how to get to the solution given that problem.
Students [kids, adults, etc.] who are working to ACE THE TEST are working to regurgitate the solution, not understanding the problem, the steps required to solve it, nor how the solution is proven to exclude type-I or type-II errors.
We create tests and we create "grading curves" and "people who break the curve" and we turn education into a competition. Competitive vs cooperative is good for SGE but the lesson from that is that it's NOT good for the goals of education.
These winners [grow up to] become researchers who repeat this fallacy.
Teaching to the test is not a good thing if our goal is to increase the spread of knowledge [education].
Walter O'Brien is a fraud, and this article is about that, not about the show. It's much appreciate by all that this thread persists as it keeps his name in the searchlight.
What's fascinating is for a disconnected narcissist you're ably willing to aver "Walter O'Brien doesn't care what your thoughts are on him"...
Do you speak for Walter? Do you read his mind? Do you just "know" how he feels and what he cares about? Did aliens tell you what he cares about and what he doesn't? Do you also speak for those "others"? Are they related to "the others" from Lost!?
"...but you are so much fun to get going." Ah, so you admit being not only a narcissistic sociopath but also an Internet troll.
Walter O'Brien is a fraud. He says things and claims things that are impossibly true.
The TV show is of no relevance. Nobody except idiots (see above) watch it, and Walter's friends (see above) who come here to try and nudge the thread into a positive direction about the show.
Bad news, shils. This thread is *still* not about the show, no matter how much THE SHOW SUCKS. It's about Walter O'Brien being a fraud. He still is.
In case I'm not clear, and the thread is beyond your comprehension level for English reading just repeat these words to yourself: Walter O'Brien is a fraud. Scorpion is a stupid show. Nobody should believe a word said by Walter O'Brien or the show.
Hope this gets through that thick empty dried up husk of a coconut you use to filter messages through.
My niece was reading this techdirt comment thread...
...and you'll never believe what happened next!
No, your niece wasn't reading the comments on here and said "Uncle George, Uncle George, you need to come butt in and tell these people to give it a rest!"
"WHO CARES?" - the people who read and write. If you don't, keep your opinion to yourself, because those who walk into a forum and say "I don't care about anything you say or read but here's my opinion" are as worthless as flushed shit in a toilet.
"I'm well aware..." "I take everything..." "I don't watch..." "...I can see..." "I'd never..." "I'm 56..."
You're all about you.
"So give all your" --
No, YOU give all YOUR suggestions to anyone who cares. Like your invisible niece.
That just leaves the question of what "started a business with a dot-com" name means for a 13-year old kid in a country that wasn't on the Internet, and which he did - five years before a browser was invented (which is what propelled the proliferation of the Internet) - five years before commercial traffic was even allowed on the Internet [other than in furtherance of NSFNET goals]
Occam's Razor - the simplest answer is likely correct.
Ehud /obligatory preempt: No, I am not obsessed with Walter O'Brien. I'm yet another one of the millions of people who voraciously consume information and don't like to spit up pits.