Every car dealer I have ever known has screwed someone I know. Between the dealerships and their incestuous relationships with car loan lenders you'd be lucky to walk out not paying twice what the damn thing is worth by the end of it.
There are so many ways to pull this off without being a jerk.
If they REALLY wanted the domain name they could have offered to buy it for the ludicrous amount of money they're paying their legal council. They could come up with an agreement to buy the domain if the guy ever stops using it (some sort of right of first refusal if he ever sells the domain). If they were really interested in disambiguation they could have asked for a link on the guy's page ("if you're looking for Gaijin Entertainment...").
Instead they sic the lawyers on a blog that's been around since nearly the dawn of the commercial internet. /facepalm
If they're so worried about such a tarnishing of their mark, why haven't they gone after Gaijin Games yet?
Except iPhones aren't really all that affordable. Which is why it's one of the few solid markets for such repair work.
They aren't particularly cheap either. I've seen iPhones and iPads keep trucking with cracked screens that put lesser phones and tablets out of commission.
(for the record, I am an iPad user; I am likely to never own an iPhone; The hardware is solid, but I still think they both suck.)
That's hilarious how backwards they got that etymology in the Manchurian Candidate.
http://youtu.be/LBDhoUZgsDo?t=2m5s
"Allow me to introduce our American... visitors. I must ask you to forgive thier somewhat lackadaisical manners as I have conditioned them, or BRAINWASHED them, which I understand is the new American word for it..."
Money in a Capitalist society = Power... and Power corrupts.
Actually, like just about all all old memes, it goes back to a Simpson's episode.
If you have a Wikipedia admin account under your control, this is totally the wrong way to go about destroying an article. What you do is have *other* people edit the articles you want to change and then wield your admin power to quash descent with the power of the banhammer.
The DCRI could learn a lot from MI6 or some of the private Wikipedia "editing projects" (conspiracies?) that have come to light over the years.
If you're feeling brave and have a copy of a game that has an exploitable bug (like the first James Bond game from the XBox) you can wire it up to flash the on-board firmware w/ mod chip firmware.
After getting bored with Halo, I caught myself not really playing games on the thing so I made it my old set-top media player was an old XBox I did this too years ago.
Downside of it though: 720p is about the BEST you can get out of an original XBox. Thing is pretty much a doorstop these days.
As a general rule you should not be able to directly write about yourself for the encyclopedia. It's hard to not have a point of view on the subject of yourself.
That's where Wikipedia's rule about editing your own page (or an organization editing it's own page) comes from. Of course this doesn't stop you from having someone related to you do the edit of your Wikipedia page. This happens more often than you think. People get friends to whitewash their entries all the time, and if you happen to know an admin or have protection from on high, the sky is the limit.
I can kind of agree w/ ootb's point here, the editorial polices on Wikipedia aren't exactly stellar, aren't always enforced equally; some are just more equal than others. And they do have a commercial interest, just like any organization that exists on donations, you can't piss off your whales.
It is quite a slippy slope: If my security is negligent I can charge the person who discovered it for costs incurred notifying my customers of my negligent security?
Won't matter. Bottom feeders like these will file bogus claims on your gameplay videos and make free money. Since there is no disincentive to making bogus claims it's free money.
So, what happens when a claim is found to be bogus? Since they IMMEDIATELY start monetizing the video as soon as a "proper" claim is filed, once it's declared bogus, who gets the money? Do the fraudsters get back charged if one of their claims is later found to be bogus?
Hell, if a bogus company can get away with this, I just thought of an awful way to break the system: Get together a bunch of people to make up fake copyright organizations and hammer every popular video or shamelessly promoted video with claims. Basically accelerate what they're already doing and ruin it for the fraudsters. Publicize it, turn it into a public protest to show how the system is broken.
That $20k was probably new, from Cisco, with an extended service contract and licenses for extra software options and packages of users licenses.
I'm pretty sure that if it's anything like the rest of their "Enterprise" level gear you cannot download patches and firmware upgrades with out a valid service contract, which on average I've noticed costs about 10% of the initial cost per year.
One time I bought a small business Cisco firewall/router on "the secondary market", and damnest thing, if I had more than 10 devices on the network at a time, one of them would get it's connection out to the internet dropped. Turns out the thing had a 10 user license. facepalm Currently it's warming an AV rack in my friend's living room as his needs come in way under 10 routable IPs.
... about why you don't hear much about Novell NetWare these days and most of business IT uses Active Directory.
Why is this ( http://xkcd.com/1058/ ) xkcd strip the first thing that popped into my head with that comment?
At least it isn't like some of their enterprise stuff, that requires $1000 service contracts to download upgrades/updates.
It's too bad dd-wrt won't run on these new routers.
And as far as "running apps on your router" I have a few routers w/ OpenWRT I do just that with... but they're *my* apps adding what functionality I want to my router.
Looked up a review or two, and it seems to me that they want to do for the router what Apple and Android did for the phone with this "app" thing.
This is exactly the reason for #12 on the Evil Overlord list:
12. One of my advisors will be an average five-year-old child. Any flaws in my plan that he is able to spot will be corrected before implementation.
Srsly, maybe it's the rarefied air up there in DC, but there are times when I wonder where our congress-critters put their think-pans.
Horrible analogy, but true. It is already fairly trivial to spoof a cell phone tower and log everything that passes through before sending it out on the network, not to mention the ability to use the phone's GPS to get location data remotely.
Hell, Sprint has a $5/month service where you can ping a phone and get it's GPS coordinates anytime it's on and connected to the network.
So, Gabe is suggesting an honest to goodness "asshole tax"?
Actually...
I hope they DoJ goes after the reporters for CFAA violations and wins. If the DoJ refuses to go after them, it shows a definite double standard (weev is a troll/AT&T is more important that TerraCom). That and the court battle would be epic, and due to the more sympathetic defendants has a better shot at appeal then weev's case.
Also, as evidenced by the DoJ subpoenas of AP and FoxNews' phone records, the one surefire way to make sure "how abusive these laws are" gets into the goldfish-sized attention span of the professional news media is to use those laws against the professional news media.