BlackBerry 10 Live Webcast - <AUTHOR> http://tremolo.edgesuite.net/blackberry_experience_launch/desktop_dvr/index.html

<comment><USER3> "We've created a new position at BlackBerry, a Global Creative Director."

"We needed someone who is creative, and into technology."

"Alicia Keys is BlackBerry's new Creative Director."

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO

<comment><USER4> Can you smell the desperation?

<comment><USER3> This is a sure sign in any presentation that they're done talking about things that will actually sell their product.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> 70k Apps on the New Platform. I am very impressed by this. They mentioned all the popular apps that have come onboard.. but I didn't see a mention of Instagram. That resonates with the young crowd. Instagram should have been in the Keynote pitch!

Never the less, this could have gone horribly wrong, but I think BB did good today.

edit: I hope the iPhone does something similar to Peak. Which I thought was a lot more intuitive than double-tapping the home-button, switching apps, then switching back.

<comment><USER6> What good is 70k apps if ~69k of them are are crap?

<comment><USER7> A thousand of them :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> FYI there is no company named "Research In Motion" anymore. They've changed their name to Blackberry.

[http://stream.wsj.com/story/research-in-motions- blackberry-1...](http://stream.wsj.com/story/research-in-motions- blackberry-10-and-new-devices/SS-2-150702/SS-2-156813/)

</comment><comment><USER9> "No need to reboot your phone to install an app". Oh. Wow.

<comment><USER10> I feel like they are focusing too much on the fact that they finally have these features that have been available for years on other platforms, and not enough on their unique feature.

<comment><USER11> I'm hoping above is an isolated case? Otherwise creating any content that can easily be made fun of is really bad for the launch as it will create noise and distract from the good.

<comment><USER12> There were many other cases. One of the money quotes: "Typing on a glass screen with one thumb. Magic." Hah. BB10 may be a very nice OS, but the company attitude is absolutely miserable. They're still pretending that they're innovating at the very cutting edges of the market while introducing features almost 6 or 7 years old. It's silly.

<comment><USER13> I don't agree with you on the magical one thumb experience. I don't feel that my Android and iOS devices allow me to navigate that smoothly throughout my content, social networks and applications in general. The keyboard and the one thumb mode was also very impressive.

<comment><USER12> Oh really? Hm. Well, maybe I'm bashing their marketing too early. But I've been typing with one thumb on iOS and Android for like 4 years and have been pretty well satisfied. It could be improved I'm sure, and maybe BB has improved it. But whatever they've done, calling it 'Magic' makes me laugh.

<comment><USER14> It's something that was (IMO) ruined by this trend for giant phones. I can't even reach the notification bar of my Android phone without heavy straining now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Having developed for BB before, I cannot tell how bad their toolchain and libraries and HW/SW protocol layers are. I highly doubt that they can fix all these in one big fat major release. Considering the fact that RIM is bleeding, this may be their one and only chance though. Good luck RIM, it is always good to have more options in the market...

<comment><USER16> Can't you just develop an Android app now and repackage it for the BB10? Is it that easy or have I heard wrong?

<comment><USER17> Yes, and they'll pay you per app AND they are doing a revenue guarantee for the year above a download threshold I believe.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I tried to develop an epub reader app for BB10 using their HTML5 webworks toolkit. I know it is probably not the best platform for this given the XML work required for the format, but I couldn't get past the "open a file on the device" step. A quick look through their developer forums showed a lot of people with the same issue.

Oh, and I'm also not experienced with developing apps for any BB platform so I admit that I'm definitely part of the problem.

That being said, I'm rooting for them. The space needs a third player. They really need to figure out simple things like this though.

<comment><USER19> You should look into using their Cascades toolkit. It's based on Qt/QML so anything you learn there will be useful for desktop Linux, Windows, Mac, Ubuntu Phone, Sailfish, Plasma Active and also for Android and iOS soon. It's a worthwhile investment in my mind.

<https://developer.blackberry.com/cascades/> <https://qt-project.org/>

<comment><USER18> Thanks. I'll check it out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> That video screen share feature is kind of amazing and the demo for it was flawless. Well done.

</comment><comment><USER21> This looks interesting <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9TSHk3Oed0>

Not sure how practical it will and if it can be used when using the flash.

<comment><USER22> Very clever. Seems like it would be pretty good for getting rid of blinks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I wish I could see it :(

Link from us homepage: [http://global.blackberry.com/blackberry-10.html?iid=us:bb:de...](http://global.blackberry.com/blackberry-10.html?iid=us:bb:desktop:homepage:dec2012:footer:bb10)

Internal Server Error - <USER2>

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request. Reference #3.d4bb97d8.1359563481.4f7750e

<http://screencast.com/t/jMhPotAn>

</comment><comment><USER24> Can you install apps without a gatekeeper on Blackberry 10? Like you can currently do on OSX, Windows, Android etc?

How was this in previous versions?

<comment><USER25> IIRC from my time with the PlayBook, everything has to be signed, but there's minimal hoops to getting your own signing key (no fee). Unclear if you could load arbitrary apps that you haven't personally signed, never tried.

Old BlackBerry, everything had to be signed by RIM's servers, even for dev builds. Which is incredibly entertaining when their servers go down while you're trying to get a release out (those days are far, far behind me now)

<comment><USER26> I believe that it is possible to load apps via USB from a computer just enabling the "debug" features in the PB's settings. It's been a long time since I last used my PlayBook, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I just hope they stop requiring dev builds to go through a signing process on their servers. This alone would do wonders for their third party support.

</comment><comment><USER28> why are so many people excited over this? all I got was...blackberry has apps...what's my incentive to switch from android then?

<comment><USER29> My reasons for being excited:

1) Physical keyboard in the Q10

2) No Android, no Google

3) Hardware and software made by the same company

4) No Samsung/HTC/etc crapware customizations

5) Hopefully more top-down design and app store curation ala iOS

6) My Bold 9900 feels expensive; most Android phones I've played with feel cheap and plasticky

7) LTE, which the otherwise interesting Nexus 4 doesn't have

8) The BB10 UI looks less like an art school project than WP8

<comment><USER30> So aside from the keyboard, it's basically the same as my iPhone4.

<comment><USER31> Sure, in the same way that all smartphones are "basically the same".

<comment><USER30> All smartphones aren't new to the market and looking to regain a lost share though.

<comment><USER31> I'm afraid I don't understand the point you are making.

<comment><USER30> In order to be successful, RIM/Blackberry needs to do more than just put out a phone that is equal to the competition (iPhone/Android). They've already had 2-3 years of people leaving them in droves, and those people are now, for the most part, happy with their new choices.

Saying: "Look, BB10 can do everything your phone can do" is going to be met with a "So what?" by most of those users. There needs to be something in a new phone to _cause people to change_.

So like I said, outside of a keyboard, which isn't even available yet, I don't see anything in the new phone that does this.

At the very best, all Blackberry can hope for is that this phone stems the tide of current BB users opting for other smartphones. That's not going to save the company though.

<comment><USER31> >In order to be successful, RIM/Blackberry needs to do more than just put out a phone that is equal to the competition

Not really. As far as most people are concerned, all phones are equal. So, do none of them exist? All phones being basically equal works to blackberry's advantage. People choose whatever phone they like aesthetically, as they are all essentially the same (same screens, same CPUs, same memory, same apps, etc, etc).

>Saying: "Look, BB10 can do everything your phone can do" is going to be met with a "So what?"

Ok, but that isn't what was said. You said "its basically the same as my iphone4". That of course entirely depends on the context you want to view "basically the same" in. To a lot of people, all smartphones are "basically the same", so as I said, in that context your statement is correct. If you are making a detailed comparison of features, then both new blackberry models are obviously significantly better than your iphone4.

>So like I said, outside of a keyboard, which isn't even available yet, I don't see anything in the new phone that does this.

A user interface that doesn't actively punish me for trying to use it?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> >The Z10, which starts at $199 with a wireless contract, will be available on Jan. 31 in the U.K., on Feb. 5 in Canada, and in March in the U.S. The Q10 will follow in coming weeks, the company said.

U.K. then Canada, interesting. I wonder why their home country isn't first?

<comment><USER18> BlackBerry is very popular in the UK and it is a larger market. Canada is only a few days away. I imagine it has a lot more to do with the carrier acceptance process then anything RIM (now BlackBerry) has done.</comment></comment>


Docker's new enterprise edition gives containers an out-of-the-box experience - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/02/dockers-new-enterprise-edition-gives-containers-an-out-of-the-box-experience/ <comment><USER2> correct me if I am wrong but is 1 year LTS for an EE viable? Will EE clients like that time frame?

<comment><USER3> Viable - probably.

Will we like it - definitely not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This basically reads like a press release. Any details on what would make this more attractive to enterprise customers other than maybe supporting a couple more hosts?

<comment><USER5> There are more details on the release blog post: [https://blog.docker.com/2017/03/docker-enterprise- edition/](https://blog.docker.com/2017/03/docker-enterprise-edition/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Can someone explain what is "out of box" experience about it?

</comment><comment><USER7> It feels weird to me that their marketing pitch is "for you big enterprise customers we've made a simple to use version". That's home or small biz use, not enterprise. The idea of a dumbed-down/less features/no shape edges as being "enterprise" software is befuddling to - isn't it the exact opposite?

<comment><USER6> You read these articles too closely. You are meant to read between the lines.

<comment><USER8> Can you be more specific? What's in between those lines?

<comment><USER9> If there is a problem, you have a neck to choke.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Low Bar, High Ceiling - The Posterous Philosophy - <AUTHOR> http://www.sexywidget.com/my_weblog/2009/07/low-bar-high-ceiling-the-posterous-philosophy.html

<comment><USER2> FYI: Your website is improperly categorized by OpenDNS as 'Adult Themes' (probably due to the word 'sexy' in the domain), and therefore blocked for me. I flagged it as improperly categorized. Hopefully it gets resolved soon as I am interested in reading this post.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the heads up. For a long time, this blog ranked on the first page of Google in Saudi Arabia for the keyword "sexy." Lots of useless traffic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I found it ironic at the end of the article, it said "You can follow Garry on Twitter HERE." instead of posterous.

<comment><USER4> Not like they are mutually exclusive

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Not wanting users to sign up right away and hiding your advanced features sounds like odd/contrary advice. On the low end, wouldn't you want Aunt Suzy to sign up right away (before she gets confused) and geeky Nephew Bill to know how to connect your app to all his favorite social sites (without digging for it)?

<comment><USER6> The delayed sign up idea seems to be very potent. Rather than having someone dump all of their information into your database right away (which you then have to save, probably for as long as your app is running), you slowly draw the information out of the user, making the registration process as transparent as possible. If (using your example) Aunt Suzy goes through all the work to sign up, then gets confused, not only does she have a bad taste in her mouth when it comes to your app ("Oh, MyBigApp? Yeah, I tried it once, but after I spent 20 minutes signing up I got confused and left"), she also won't be coming back to use that sign up if she got confused. For the most part, there's no reason to have a user registered for something if they're not going to use it.

In regards to connecting apps, I'm really not convinced being able to do that is a good idea (I hate it when people have to post everything they do online to Facebook, or whatever else they use). There are people who like it, so it may be worth having, but it certainly isn't a feature I would encourage using.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you maintain balance between learning and building stuff? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER3> I often find that building stuff just so happens to be the best way to learn stuff.

<comment><USER4> Agreed. I often even go so far as pick a specific project because of what I'll need to learn. This is especially so for projects outside of my day job.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I divide the two missions into "need to know" and "want to learn" and focus on producing when building something.

For example, I needed to learn how to use CouchDB to upgrade a web app I maintain so I spent the time necessary to get that done by working on it a piece at a time and learning what I needed to know as I went along.

CouchDB does a lot that I didn't need to do, and while I want to learn more about some of it, and will get to that, I didn't need to learn about it all in-depth to be productive and get the job done.

I wanted to learn a bit about using HTML5 animations to create graphic gauges for digital sensors so I spent enough time narrowly focused on that until I reached a point that accomplished what I was wanting to do.

What I ended up with was a hack because the first thing I did was look for existing code examples and libraries to interface with the sensor I purchased (a magnetometer). This approach allowed me to prototype a digital compass very quickly and gain an high level understanding of what's necessary to accomplish that, and it worked surprisingly well.

</comment><comment><USER6> By building things I don't know how to build.

</comment><comment><USER7> Find _appropriate, helpful_ new technology to bring into your projects. Not just some cool-sounding new thing - something that will add value to the project. In doing so, you learn that new thing.

Don't do everything new - you don't get anything done that way, or at least not very fast. Instead, bring in one or two new things for a project. This lets you improve your own skills _and_ improve the code base.

Let me emphasize again that this has to be done with technology that is appropriate to the project. It requires good judgment (and even a sense of taste) to do this well.

</comment><comment><USER8> I suppose you're talking about software development.

When people use the word building like this it reminds me of that episode of Spongebob where he taps a block of marble once and out comes Michelangelo's statue of David.

If you're critical of your own work, building things will push you into deeper into your craft and into other domains.

How much to learn? Just enough to start with the use of references and examples.

</comment><comment><USER9> I complete toy code problems on kata sites. It allows me to exercise producing code, learning techniques, and reviewing other's code to learn more.

This helps for building a solid foundation in a language, but greater mastery usually requires project work. I'm not too great at balancing this part out yet.

</comment><comment><USER10> IMHO its all about time management, proper planning, and your passion for learning.

You may schedule some time for learning specific stuff every day - <USER2> such as Coursera can enable this easily.

</comment><comment><USER11> I learn things when I need them to complete or improve the stuff I'm already building.

</comment><comment><USER12> I do a Beeminder goal that uses RescueTime to measure time spent on Coursea/learning websites for an hour or so per week per site (doing 2 sites ATM). Work the rest.</comment>


Wuhan Death Toll, Data on Cremations and Shipments of Urns - <AUTHOR> https://www.newsweek.com/wuhan-covid-19-death-toll-may-tens-thousands-data-cremations-shipments-urns-suggest-1494914 <comment><USER2> Sadly this is more plausible than the official numbers reported!</comment>


Ask HN: Any entrepreneurs and/or engineers living with ADHD? - <AUTHOR>

Background: I was diagnosed with ADHD in the sixth grade and the diagnosis made sense then, and still does today (I am 27 years old - CS graduate and software developer). I don't want to make this post into a discussion or flamewar on the existence of ADHD, whether it is overdiagnosed, etc.
I am simply curious because I understand that some fairly successful and creative people have been diagnosed with ADHD (the founder of JetBlue comes to mind) and I figure that the same must be true for a community like Hacker News. It would be very interesting to me to hear your stories!
Note: There is no "ADD" in the DSM-IV. The term ADHD is meant to include Type A (Predominantly Inattentive), Type B (Predominantly Hyperactive) and Combined. I just want to point that out so we're all speaking the same language! <comment><USER2> I was diagnosed with ADHD when I was probably in 2nd grade and took Adderall, Ritalin and Concerta. I stopped taking them about 3 months prior to finishing my Bachelors of Computer Science. I have now been 8 months with out it and have been working at my new job quite well. Prior to that for the last 2 years of my education I would only take my medication when I needed to study hard or had a test.

<comment><AUTHOR> Same here. I always hated the stimulant medications but Adderall had the greatest effect. I haven't had medication since college and only used it when I really needed it then!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> In addition to the distractibility for which it is most known; ADHD folks are often capable of super-concentration for periods of time. This is why you often find them in occupations that benefit from this capability... programming being chief among them.

Self medication with mild stimulants like caffeine is also common.

</comment><comment><USER4> I have been diagnosed with Type A in college, and I've got that hyperfocus ability at times. Medication didn't really help me so I stopped. However I recently learned I have Convergence Insufficiency, which can cause you to look as if you're ADHD. So now I don't know.

</comment><comment><USER5> Yes sir. I have heard alot of business owners / entrepreneurs have ADHD.

</comment><comment><USER6> I prefer not to discuss medical matters in public, but anyone in need of a peer is welcome to email.

</comment><comment><USER7> Sometimes it feels like pretty much every entrepreneur has ADHD.</comment>


Adrenaline Junkie: The Ascent of John Tyndall - <AUTHOR> https://www.lrb.co.uk/v41/n06/jonathan-parry/adrenaline-junkie <comment> m-i-l See also the earlier review of this book at [https://blogs.sciencemag.org/books/2018/06/19/the-ascent- of-...](https://blogs.sciencemag.org/books/2018/06/19/the-ascent-of-john- tyndall/) .

Interesting quote:

"One day in December 1893, she [his wife] confused his chloral [sleeping potion] and the magnesia bottles, giving him a magnesia-sized dose of chloral. Within hours he was dead, though not before observing: 'My poor darling, you have killed your John.'"</comment>


Plumbing Stanley Kubrick (2012) - <AUTHOR> https://www.ianwatson.info/plumbing-stanley-kubrick/ <comment><USER2> Anyone interested in this would do well to watch _Kubrick 's Boxes_. The whole documentary used to be on youtube, but it seems now there's only a trailer and some clips from it.

The article this HN submission links to focuses on the movie that was to become AI, which Kubrick started but never finished, and which was ultimately directed by Steven Spielberg.

Another project Kubrick started and never finished was a movie on the Holocaust, which he abandoned after hearing that Spielberg's Shindler's List was coming out. There were stills from that unfinished film in an exhibit on Kubrick at the Jewish Museum in San Francisco.

<comment><USER3> Found the full documentary of _Stanley Kubrick's Boxes_ on Vimeo: [https://vimeo.com/322890808](https://vimeo.com/322890808)

It's a great little documentary.</comment></comment>


PPE face shields for first responders. Urgent call for printers - <AUTHOR> https://www.inksmith.ca/blogs/news/can-you-3d-print-this-file <comment><USER2> Neat idea, have you checked Princess Auto? They are on sale right now there for 14 bucks each, but maybe no stock in Kitchener?

Anyways thanks for the model, good work!

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Another way folks can help our 1st responders who are desperately short of equipment. Health departments everywhere should jump on the bandwagon and organize similar requests.</comment>


Launch: SEO platform for small biz - Making SEO Easy, Affordable & Measurable - <AUTHOR> http://www.searchenabler.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> SearchEnabler was launched after iterating for 6 months based on early- adopter's feedback. Targeting start-ups, small business & individuals seeking to improve online visibility via natural search traffic.</comment>


Mozilla is building an operating system - <AUTHOR> https://wiki.mozilla.org/B2G

<comment><USER3> Impressive how the most voted comments are rants about the browser.

If that's insightful or useful comments hit me...

I really don't understand this hate towards Mozilla that has been going around lately.

Edit: Why am I being downvoted? It's a sincere opinion of a person who doesn't see a relation in critizising a project of an organisation in an article that talks about other projects.

If you dont like Firefox its fine, but it's a wonderful project with millions of users and that cannot be denied.

Sending my opinion to oblivion because of pointing how unrelated the firefox rant comments are to the article makes no sense.

<comment><USER4> I think it's more like "tough love" than hate. If I bitch about Firefox, it's because I _want_ to love Firefox, but I can't. That pisses me off. If I didn't care about it, like the way I don't care about Safari or Konqueror, or Opera, I wouldn't talk about it, like I never talk about Safari or Konqueror, or Opera.

<comment><USER5> I checked your comments and you certainly aren't a regular Mozilla flamer, so I'll take what you say here at face value.

The thing that frustrates me is how many other people come out of the woodwork on any Mozilla or Firefox related post to give the story, "I used to love Firefox but it uses too much memory so I switched to Chrome and now I'm so happy". My opinion is Google has some amazing marketing and social skills to power that kind of sentiment shift. The big thing that rarely comes up in those threads is that Mozilla is a community. There are memory bugs that have been open in bugzilla for years, but there have been various people in the community working on them, sometimes in their spare time, for years as well. You look at the scope of the project, and it isn't small. It certainly isn't a hack project someone can commit a quick patch to in a day.. There are certainly paid Mozilla employees working on the code base every day, but the number doesn't compare with any of the other major browser vendors. The FirefoxFlippers™ rarely ever follow up with something like, "I tried to look at the problem and realized what a difficult thing memory management is so I took the easy path and decided to let some profit based vendor do it for me and hope that they treat me well."

My personal and probably bias experience is that I have _never_ felt a memory issue. I tend to run a lot of add-ons and I only rarely keep a lot of tabs open because I prefer to follow a pattern of opening up a bunch of things then working my way back down to zero. I feel that most memory issues are related to bad add-ons, bad plug-ins, or bad websites, and I am very happy with the new about:memory stats that show up in Aurora. I just hope that some of the FirefoxFlippers™ who aren't just trolling for Google might take a moment to try out their easily repeatable excessive memory use-cases and drop us a line so we can work together with the community to get rid of them.

I'll now take my downmodding for ranting on a post with a comment that is only tangentially related to the topic. :/

<comment><USER6> You seem to be under the impression that the difficulty of putting out a working product is something the consumer cares about. They don't.

Results are what matters, and for all too long Mozilla's results have been poor compared to Google's.

<comment><USER5> There are a lot of things that "the consumer" doesn't care about. Some of those are things that Mozilla feels are very important and we spend time trying to show people why.

Mozilla doesn't make a browser to maximize their profits by taking as much from "the consumer" as they can get away with. If we try to compete with the other vendors on those terms, I agree we will fail.

I hope that there continue to be enough people whose goals align with Mozilla, and that together we can work on improving not only Firefox but the web. As we do that, then we will be able to help more of those uncaring consumers.

<comment><USER6> This sits among the more passive-aggressive posts I've seen in a while.

 _Mozilla makes a browser._ It is evaluated in comparison with _other browsers_. It does not matter who makes those other browsers or why--and it's not like the primary contenders are "maximizing their profits" off of it anyway! The WebKit guys aren't "maximizing their profits" by writing WebKit. Google isn't "maximizing their profits" by using WebKit in Chrome. There may be some knock-on benefits for Google, but it's certainly not directly making them cartloads of money. But what they have done is written a very, very fine browser.

I was a Mozilla user well before Firefox--heck, when Mozilla Suite was EOLed I was a SeaMonkey user for a while. And then I left. Why? _Because Mozilla's browser stopped being worth my time._ The competition blew past XULRunner (lol) and Gecko (ouch) and Mozilla simply has not caught up. Maybe the memory issues have been fixed in recent years; I wouldn't know because the reason I won't go back _now_ is performance and compatibility. Lofty goals that we poor benighted consumers don't "get" are nice to have, but bringing them up because your browser can't hack what WebKit can doesn't excuse it from not being able to do so.

It is notable and both sad and funny that the only time you get the "people don't understand what we're doing!" spiel is when you don't have people singing hosannahs to your greatness. If you want them, _compete successfully_. Don't come around whining that people switched away because the things that matter to them were inadequately addressed by your development team. Because that's solely and singularly on you guys. I want you guys to do well. I truly, honestly do. Right now? You don't compete, so I avoid Firefox. Sorry.

<comment><USER7> You admit to not having used Firefox in recent years, so how do you know that Firefox "doesn't compete"?

<comment><USER6> Because I have to target it. It's installed; it is not my first or second browser of choice except to make sure CSS3 and JS don't hork.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wish they'd concentrate on making a browser that does not need to be restarted after every hour or 2 of browsing lest it become more and more unresponsive.

I wish they'd concentrate on making a browser that can start scrolling before all the Javascript on the page has finished running.

(I'm using FF 7 on Snow Leopard with 1 gig of RAM. Would I have to restart FF less often if I had more RAM?)

<comment><USER9> Firefox has made memory overhead a _serious_ priority in the Fx7 & Fx8 development cycles, with some impressive results:

<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=666058#c31>

<comment><USER8> FF 7.0a2 (got Jul 24 from the Aurora channel) is less responsive than FF 3.6 was on my machine -- although I cannot be sure that the unresponsiveness is due to memory pressure rather than, e.g., insufficient parallelism of the UI relative to the part that executes Javascript.

<comment><USER10> Possibly disable hardware acceleration.

Disable: Google Updater Google Toolbar FlashBlock if you have NoScript

<comment><USER8> Disabling hardware acceleration (it's in the General tab of the Advanced pref pane) seems to have solved the horrible problems I was having with Firefox 7. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> My first question is why? Do they have a real vision other than "me too"?

Does anyone else remember when Phoenix was first released to fight bloated browsers? Now it is that bloated browser and running an OS developed around its technologies isn't too appealing to me.

Find your roots before you start off on some other project if you hope to have any significant success.

<comment><USER12> What is your definition of bloat - size of download, application startup times, number of features, speed while being used, memory usage?

Firefox 5 without addons does not seem to be bloated to me by any of the above definitions. In terms of featuresets just for reference - <USER2> communicator used to ship with a mail client, browser, news client, html editor and a calendar.

<comment><USER11> not so much the size of the download, but all of the rest, yes.

I feel that Firefox is nearly at the point Netscape was at the point Phoenix (the original name of Firefox) came into being.

5.0 does seem a little faster.

For what it's worth, I still run Firefox (5.0) on a regular basis, including as I post this comment.

<comment><USER13> How can "Firefox be nearly at the phone of Netscape" when it doesn't ship with a mail client, irc client or any of the other related stuff that no one needed? People hear words like bloat and jump on the bandwagon. That's disappointing for a site such at this. I personally see more memory usage for the same workload (number of tabs) on Chrome over Firefox. However Chrome's memory is distributed across more processes so it's easier to hide in plain sight.

That said, I'm starting to come round to the train of thought about a user being able to control what they install. Not all users require the developer tools, in the same way that not all users require the ability to read news feeds and in the very same way that some users want enhanced share options in their browsers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Already being discussed here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2805708>

</comment><comment><USER15> Boot To Gecko is not a project to build an operation system.

IIUC, Mozilla is planning to reuse Linux and core components of Android. If anything, I would think Boot To Gecko would be better thought of as a shell around the OS. Using process separation (underway for a while now in the Electrolysis project) bugs/leaks/crashes in Gecko should be isolated and not significantly more disruptive than in normal Firefox.

I think the major value provided by (and work required for) Boot To Gecko will be on creating open standards (in the open) for access to the device so that web platform can be a first class citizen of the device.

</comment><comment><USER16> I realize they can do more than one thing at once but how about getting threaded tabs into a current build of Firefox first. Coders talented enough to make an O/S certainly should be able to make threaded tabs happen.

<comment><USER17> They just hit a pretty important milestone for that.

[http://felipe.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/initial- electrolysis-...](http://felipe.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/initial-electrolysis- patches-for-desktop-firefox-now-in-mozilla-central/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> How well is it going to be received compared with the level of effort required? ChromeOS is pretty bad and Google has been working on it for a long time.

</comment><comment><USER19> It seems strange to me that they announce this without even mentioning ChromeOS as if B2G was conceived in a cave.

<comment><USER20> The point here is not to build an OS. The point is to improve web APIs so that web apps can compete with native ones, and do it in an open fashion so that all web browsers can implement the new APIs. ChromeOS has done some of this, but neither far enough nor openly enough (what ChromeOS extensions are working on becoming cross-browser standards?).

<comment><USER13> In that case, wouldn't it be more effective to throw Mozilla's weight behind an open source mobile Operating System that actually has a chance of going mainstream ala MeeGo?

<comment><USER20> It depends on the goal. If the goal is to have an open source mobile operating system, then maybe. If the goal is to have it not matter which exact mobile operating system you use, so new mobile operating systems have an easier time entering the market.... then no.

In case it's not clear, Mozilla is not building a kernel or anything here. They're just building capabilities for web apps to be able to do whatever mobile apps can do now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I wonder if they're planning to write it in Rust? It would be interesting to see how an OS written in a more modern language than C would turn out - especially since other attempts like Microsoft's Singularity seem to have gone quiet.

</comment><comment><USER21> Wouldn't it make more sense to replace gnome/kde with gecko? Isn't that essentially what the win8 demo was all about? So many questions, so little cloud...

<comment><USER22> The wiki page doesn't do a good job explaining it, but what they're aiming at is mobile devices. Essentially they want a phone that replaces every native functionality with html/javascript. So a web application would be your phone dialer, a web application could access your NFC chip. All of the capabilities they're going for is stuff that's in the pipeline in W3C, they want to create an OS to accelerate the process (and create new standards as well).

<comment><USER23> _Essentially they want a phone that replaces every native functionality with html/javascript._

I would love to hear more about the security model.

<comment><USER20> The security model is one of the hard parts that needs working out, yes. This is just an announcement that there is a plan to work one out in case people want to participate instead of just having stuff dumped on them from on high when it's done the way Google and Apple do it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'd like to see what Mozilla comes up with. Bring it on Mozilla!

</comment><comment><USER25> Telephony Apps and api natively in the browser- yay!!!

</comment><comment><USER22> Does Mozilla have any mobile patents?

</comment><comment><USER26> I can't wait until Safari starts building its own operating system...

</comment><comment><USER27> Will it also run Internet Explorer?

</comment><comment><USER28> tl;dr -- Mozilla thinks it's a good idea to write an operating system in Javascript.</comment>


Yahoo Customer Data Security Breach Litigation Settlement - <AUTHOR> https://yahoodatabreachsettlement.com/ <comment><USER2> Out of curiosity, why does this apply to US and Isreal residents? Is there a legal framework that makes Isarelis eligible for these kinds of settlments automatically?

</comment><comment><USER3> The settlement potentially includes up to 194 million people, so if even just small part of people asks for money, they'll get just dollars. Situation with Equifax repeats itself.

<comment><USER4> Good thing we have the option to get free credit monitoring... that we just received from the last time our data was carelessly handled.

<comment><USER5> Maybe now would be a good time to create a credit monitoring startup.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> How long before an identity thief pays PR Newswire to run a story on <major company> data breach settlement and harvest all the PII requested on these sorts of settlement claim forms?

yahoodatabreachsettlement.com just looks scammy as hell. It's a pity there's not a .gov domain set up for this sort of thing - when there's a settlement, a court order gets issued for yahoo.settlements.gov to get set up.

<comment><USER7> Yep, it does look scammy as hell. I got an email from Yahoo about this settlement about a week ago and at first I thought it was spam.

From: email@example.com

Subject: Yahoo Security Breach Proposed Settlement

If you had a Yahoo account anytime in 2012 through 2016, a pending class action settlement may affect you.

A Class Action Settlement has been proposed in litigation against Yahoo! Inc. ("Yahoo") and Aabaco Small Business, LLC (together, called "Defendants" in this notice), relating to data breaches (malicious actors got into system and personal data was taken) occurring in 2013 through 2016, as well as to data security intrusions (malicious actors got into system but no data appears to have been taken) occurring in early 2012 (collectively, the "Data Breaches").

....

<comment><USER8> Yahoo is a scam in its entirety. Even their support page feels like it exists to funnel personal information to spam databases.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Credit monitoring is snake oil. These settlements are universally bullshit and mostly benefit snake oil vendors and not consumers.

Also FWIW the damage figures are also nonsense, how much can the equifax leak hurt anyone if their data was already for sale on ssndob? Almost all Americans have had their information compromised in hacks they've never heard of.

Am I wrong?

<comment><USER10> > Credit monitoring is snake oil.

What we really need is to shift the burden of proof from the consumer to the lender. If the lender cannot establish beyond a reasonable doubt that they entered into a contact with the consumer, then the consumer can sue them. Just having the SSN, name, address of the consumer, etc. shouldn't be enough to prove the lender entered into a contact with the consumer.

<comment><USER9> >then the consumer can sue them

For what? The consumer isn't responsible anyway if the lender gets defrauded.

Is the fraud in itself not enough of a punishment for the lender?

I'd argue that the real problem here are the regulators who have shaped this broken system. Not the lack of punishments for existing within it.

>Just having the SSN, name, address of the consumer, etc. shouldn't be enough to prove the lender entered into a contact with the consumer.

It isn't. The lender enters into a contract with a fraudster and gets fucked. The lender is the victim, not the consumer.

<comment><USER11> I had trouble getting an apartment because of credit fraud. Was I not a victim in the situation? I had to spend hours on the phone over months getting my credit report cleared. I guess I'm being entitled and poor ole Bank of America was the real victim here.

<comment><USER12> Customers shouldn't have to be on the phone for days to solve a bank's problem. Credit fraud (please don't help banks by calling it identity theft) should be handled like American Express handles credit card fraud. I see a fraudulent charge on my bill, I call up AMEX one time and tell them this charge is fraud, and that's it! They take it from there, restore the balance, do the investigation and charge back the vendor. They usually ask that you at least try to get in touch with the vendor first and that's reasonable.

Maybe I've been lucky but every time I've had to do a chargeback it's been this smooth.

Credit reporting should be the same. I should get a statement in the mail every month from these agencies showing all credit activity and inquiries, and have a simple and painless way to dispute fraudulent data.

I should also be able to opt out and not participate in the credit reporting system but that's a topic for a different thread.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "Under the terms of the Settlement, Yahoo has enhanced, or, through its successor in interest, Oath Holdings Inc. ("Oath"), continues to enhance its business practices that will improve the security of its users' personal information stored on its databases. Defendants will also pay for a Settlement Fund of $117,500,000. The Settlement Fund will provide a minimum of two years of Credit Monitoring Services to protect Settlement Class Members from future harm, or an alternative cash payment for those who verify they already have credit monitoring or identity protection."

<comment><USER14> Why do judges agree to forcing consumers to have useless product of credit monitoring in place to receive a cash payout?

Can I set up a "virtual" credit monitoring that provides that type of service in name only to cover that requirement? Imagine paying $5 to claim you have credit monitoring for settlement purposes.

<comment><USER15> I mean, you should have one from one of the many previous breaches. Also, arguably your credit card or mortgage company may be providing you enough monitoring to claim you have it. For those who suffered under TurboTax, Intuit offers a free credit monitoring service as well.

Credit monitoring, like antivirus, is something you should have, but should not be paying for.

<comment><USER16> It's 2019. "Credit monitoring", like antivirus, is something you simply should not have. Rather, you should take steps to avoid being beholden to broken systems in the first place.

For "credit monitoring" specifically, individuals should not be doing the surveillance bureau's work _for them_. If lenders don't think it is necessary to do diligence when issuing credit, then why should I make up for it by half- policing [0] use of my public identifiers? The more painful fraud is for lenders, the more incentive they have to actually do some diligence rather than trying to push their lack of responsibility onto everyone else.

[0] If I had total legal control over the use of my public identifiers, I would simply tell the surveillance bureaus to delete all data kept on me. But we are not given this option, which indicates how the surveillance bureaus do not work for us. The less we give them, the better.

<comment><USER15> Well, I have a mortgage, so not being beholden to them isn't really an option.

<comment><USER16> It seems that already having a mortgage means you're much less beholden than someone who intends to apply for one in the future...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I bet with the right commands (ex:SQL Injection Commands), you could make this settlement fund print out it's records. Look at how unnecessarily verbose and pretty the error message output is: [https://yahoodatabreachsettlement.com/x](https://yahoodatabreachsettlement.com/x)

I haven't tried it but it looks ripe for attack. A security noob could try using SQLMap and Nikto. If that were to happen though, would there be a class action lawsuit against the class action settlement team?

</comment><comment><USER18> Is it worth it to sign up? I get so many notices for settlements and they all want my SSN, I would rather keep that private rather than give it away for what is likely to be a very small settlement.</comment>


Get started right with RVM - <AUTHOR> http://sirupsen.com/get-started-right-with-rvm/

<comment><USER2> RVM is one of those tools that you add to your arsenal that makes you go back and think how you ever got by without it before. This is particularly true if you are working on multiple projects, all of which have their own Ruby versioning/gem set requirements. It's incredible how trivial management has become when I'm dealing with 1.8.7, 1.9.2 and JRuby 1.5.2 (concurrently) on an almost daily basis.

<comment><USER3> Amen, brother.

I don't know how I ever managed multiple projects before RVM. Thinking back, I don't think I'd ever call what I was doing "management"...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Another important think to note when using RVM is to not use 'sudo' when installing gems. It is easy get caught up in a README or tutorial and execute 'sudo gem install...' as listed in the document. Unfortunately, this installs the gem in root's environment, which isn't configured with RVM goodness using the default installation method and you'll quickly end up with all sorts of problems and obscure error messages.

</comment><comment><USER5> Personally I find it a bit of an overkill for me, and I doubt that it plays nice with other package managers... (if anyone knows more I'd like to hear more about it).

That said I understand people doing a lot of work on other people's computers (e.g. Ruby on Rail) may find it really useful.

Personally now it's 1.9.2 all the way! :D

<comment><USER6> That's what kept me from it, but if you use Ruby you're already using two layers of package managers (your system package manager manages Ruby and RubyGems, RubyGems manages gems). Putting RVM in the middle just deepens that. Being able to quickly switch Ruby versions for different projects is a big convenience.

<comment><USER5> Exactly. My fear actually started when I realised exactly that. Now, maybe it works beautifully... dunno, and if someone does please enlighten me. :)

I can see the appeal of something like RVM. But despite using Ruby a lot, it's mostly stuff for myself so I just use whatever it's the latest. The reason why I thought about RVM was that I wanted to try MacRuby (and rare cases when I need to move back to the system's ruby) and was suggested to use RVM.

<comment><AUTHOR> If it's just you, doing stuff for yourself, RVM may not bring a lot of new to you: Correct.

RVM is great to test against different versions (and implementations), especially if you do a lot of team-work: For instance, if you work in a team, or in production environments, the newest version of Ruby may be ahead of the production version, and then it's a must being able to switch from one version, or implementation, to another--painlessly.

A personal use case I could come up with (there are a lot of them): You make an app., and it runs with Ruby 1.9.2. You deploy this app., and then Ruby 1.9.3 is released, and your app. is no longer compatible. You want to stay on the cutting-edge still, so you want 1.9.3, but your project is not compatible with 1.9.3, and still needs some work to be, since it's grown rather huge. Here RVM would be handy!

When I was just toying around with Ruby, I didn't use RVM either. It's not until I've got work within the Ruby field, I've had the need for it. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> After installing RVM if gem is giving you a zlib error, this info was useful on both Ubuntu and Debian: <http://rvm.beginrescueend.com/packages/zlib/>

edit: I put up a short tutorial on how to get this running on Lenny: <http://www.reedglaw.com/rails/InstallRailsRVM>

</comment><comment><USER8> I discovered this last week and almost instantly donated some cash to the developer. It has easily already saved me hours of manual effort.

</comment><comment><USER9> _we do not need to use sudo to install gems, as everything is kept in ~/.rvm_

It's not that you don't need to, it's that you shouldn't. Using sudo to install gems will do so outside of your rvm gemset, and so the gems you install this way will not be available to your app using the gemset.

</comment><comment><USER10> How does that gemset stuff fit in with Bundler? It's much easier for us to just keep Gemfile in the git repo, run "bundle install", and then let Bundler worry about installing gems and keeping a clean gem environment.

<comment><USER11> You can use gemsets and bundler together.

Gemsets simply allow you to have an isolated environment. If you want to install the gems from multiple projects in the same gemset the choice is yours.

Bundler just makes installing each project's dependencies easier.

The pattern I started to use recently was to check in include an .rvm file with the same gemset name as the project.

This way, I simply clone the project, install bundler, and then issue bundle install and my project is ready to go.

<comment><USER12> You can do this automatically with

        rvm ruby@gemset --create --rvmrc

`--create` creates a gemset if it doesn't already exist, and `--rvmrc` makes a .rvmrc file to automatically switch to that gemset when you cd into the current directory. This makes it easy enough, that I have a gemset per application/project, and then use bundler to install the deps.

<comment><USER11> Probably just personal preference, but for me, I like to have the .rvmrc file in source control so that I don't have to think about setting it up.

The first time I navigate to the directory the gemset is created.

Still a good tip. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Nifty. Was searching for a how-to yesterday. Thanks!</comment>


Atlassian Stash Renamed to Bitbucket Server - <AUTHOR> https://www.atlassian.com/software/bitbucket/server <comment><AUTHOR> I'd like to point that change happened when I was reading their API docs and it was quite confusing for few minutes.</comment>


Professor admits faking AIDS vaccine to get $19M in grants - <AUTHOR> http://nypost.com/2013/12/26/professor-admits-faking-aids-vaccine-to-get-19m-in-grants/ <comment><USER2> _" Han agreed last month not to seek government contracts for three years, the register said."_

Something's missing from the story. He committed major fraud in a federal grant: where're the felony charges? People spend years in prison for this type of crime (e.g. [0-2]); so, something's off.

The _Federal Register_ notice the OP is citing is probably this one: [3].

[0] [http://www.albany.edu/~scifraud/data/sci_fraud_4952.html](http://www.albany.edu/~scifraud/data/sci_fraud_4952.html)

[1] [http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/November/11-crm-1547.html](http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/November/11-crm-1547.html) (hey that's Carmen Ortiz!)

[2] [http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/11/ex- psu_pr...](http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/11/ex- psu_prof_craig_grimes_sente.html)

[3] [https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/12/23/2013-304...](https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/12/23/2013-30424/findings- of-research-misconduct)

<comment><USER3> I agree, this seems like it should be heavily prosecuted. This sort of misbehavior and subsequent lack of serious enforcement is just grist to the mill of people who want to cut scientific funding across the board, claim climate change is a hoax by grant-chasing scientists etc.

<comment><USER4> Why isn't this considered "grant piracy" and this guy charged with wire-fraud by the feds? Surely he mis-used the postal service, banking system, and inter- state commerce in here somewhere? Why not a conspiracy under RICO? there seem to be all kinds of ways to send a better message than...please wait three years to attempt your next crime!

<comment><USER5> Laws aren't meant to be weapons to be used against those we hate. If he committed a crime, then let his actual crime be the crime we charge him with. Laws against wire fraud protect people from a certain kind of malicious behavior which wasn't exhibited here.

Going down the route of "find crimes to charge him with" is a bad idea for many reasons, one being: if it becomes commonplace to bend the spirit of laws just to send a message, then that will make the already-too-powerful courts even moreso.

<comment><USER6> I agree with your premise that the spirit of a law shouldn't be violated to send a message but I don't see that it applies here.

For me this doesn't pass the sense test: should a person be able to knowingly, intentionally fake the results of a scientific experiment in order to secure a grant of taxpayer money? No. No more than you should be able to fake the 'results' of your yearly income, say, for the purpose of receiving welfare.

<comment><USER7> I don't believe the comment was to not charge the guy with anything, it was not to charge him with more than necessary to punish him for the crime he actually did commit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> _" Han agreed last month not to seek government contracts for three years, the register said."_

Hmmm, well if you're caught faking your science how do you ever get a job again where you can apply for a grant? One would hope he would switch professions at this point.

<comment><USER9> Hopefully the people reviewing his grants in three years time will remember him.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Not sure exactly how a smart person can choose to do something that's so obviously going to get him caught and ruin his career. Lying about something as highly visible as an AIDS vaccine seems just plain stupid, whatever the ethics of it may be...

<comment><USER11> Reproducibility is a big problem in biology right now. He probably thought he could delay people finding out until he can produce good legitimate research that might distract attention away from the faked data.

I was thinking, "please don't be Chinese" when I read the title. Fuck.

<comment><USER12> I was under the impression that the name _Dong-Pyou Han_ was of Korean origin?

<comment><USER13> Han is a valid Chinese and Korean last name.

However, this researcher appears to be Chinese based on his previous publication history (he was affiliated with a university in Shanghai prior to coming to the states which is unlikely occurrence for a Korean)

<comment><USER14> I think you've got it wrong: [http://www.nature.com/emm/journal/v32/n1/abs/emm20002a.html](http://www.nature.com/emm/journal/v32/n1/abs/emm20002a.html)

He was previously affiliated with Yonsei University, located in Seoul.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> _The falsified results prompted more funding for the vaccine effort._

But, of course... ;D

[http://www.kcci.com/news/central-iowa/isu-researcher- admits-...](http://www.kcci.com/news/central-iowa/isu-researcher-admits-to- faking-aids-research- resigns/-/9357080/23630668/-/v96wr/-/index.html?absolute=true)

</comment><comment><USER15> one summer in college, i had a research-y project at a respected state school (which shall remain nameless except to say not a UC), wherein one of the program organizers publicly admitted to falsifying data. now this wasn't data that anyone was going to look at too carefully, and the justification was that it would get aid for some noble cause in need (although apparently not as in need as the prof. thought it ought to be), but...

c'mon, "scientists," don't just start lying to people.

</comment><comment><USER16> Besides the issue of his seemingly trivial prosecution that others posters have noted, I also wonder what he spent the grant on, or planned to?

<comment><USER17> Unless science funding is different in the US, and as far as I know it is not, he cannot spend it on personal things. The worst he could do is buy himself some computers "for research" then use them for only for personal use, or give them to family. Purchases still need to go through the university. Sometimes grant money even has restrictions on this, e.g. it can be used only for students.

He most likely did this to get more resources for research work. E.g. it was motivated by a desire for fame and status.

<comment><USER18> Reading the thread sibling responses, it seems plausible you could get around that? (I'm just a lay-person.)

I mean, you pay the University $XX for "misc facilities and support". That goes into the school's fund. Later, the Dean gives you a "completely unrelated and coincidental" Xmas bonus of $X. Also out of the school's fund. It's not grant money at that point. It's from a general discretionary fund that just happens to get deposits for services provided to grant based science.

So... money laundering basically I guess?</comment></comment></comment>


4chan creator Chris Poole draws a future where anyone can make art - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/8/3942110/drawquest-for-ipad-chris-poole-moot

<comment><USER2> As someone that make apps for childrne, I must say that what he is doing there is completely awesome.

I will take a look, and cower in fear as there are such things on the market ready to stomp my business.</comment>


Pirate Joe's, Maverick Distributor of Trader Joe's Products, Shuts Down - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/business/pirate-joes-trader-joes-vancouver.html?_r=0 <comment><USER2> I don't understand with what right trader Joe's can prohibit somebody from reselling their products. If he clearly states where he bought them from, and that he is not affiliated, and doesn't misuse their trademarks (impersonate them), it should be absolutely legal.

A side remark, people often say how great the US / north America is for entrepreneurs, compared to (continental) Europe where there is a lot of red tape and regulations. But in my opinion, if I were to do this in Germany there is no way ALDI (whom trader Joe's belongs to iirc) could sue me out of business. Not even with the old frivolous "we are wrong but you can't afford the defense" trick. There is just so much legal uncertainty in NA that it would give me nightmares doing business there.

<comment><USER3> A lot of people are using the "I bought chips at Costco and resold them at a concession stand example". This is at least a little different.

Say you owned Captainmuon Grocery and only sold private label Captainmuon Chips. Although demand is so high you could distribute your Chips to other groceries and retailers, you see greater value in driving traffic to your store through the exclusive distribution. Don't you have a legal right to create exclusive distribution of your consumable product? Don't you have a legal right to enter into a contract with your shoppers (i.e. You agree to purchase consumable products for consumption only and not resell them)? Don't you have the legal right to limit your _product liability_ (i.e. If I buy and resell a defective bag of your chips, possibly becoming defective after it left your store, you will be jointly and severally liable for the damages as a result of a products liability lawsuit)?

Only playing devils advocate, but I do believe you can play with the facts to highlight the push and pull of contractual rights, ownership/resale rights, and product liability. Also, playing with the facts would highlight how trademark rights/goodwill could be more negatively effected, again something more along the lines of a reseller selling tampered/expired product.

<comment><USER4> Nope. You don't have any of those legal rights.

The courts agreed, but Trader Joes had bigger pockets and was able to kill Pirate Joes with just legal fees alone. They didn't have to win, they just had to keep him in court until he was broke. This is a pretty common tactic when big corporations are in lawsuits with individuals. Or in the case of healthcare suits they just wait until the plaintiff is dead of whatever condition they're suing over.

<comment><USER5> >keep him in court until he was broke

How many times do we have to hear these kinds of stories of abuse, or patent trolls, or of other unfairness and injustice in the legal system before anything is done about it?

I mean the legal system produces some incredible injustices currently: If we get more stories such as billionaires like Jeffrey Epstein raping underage girls and getting a house-arrest with week nights spent sleeping in a special cell, what does that imply for the rest of us?

The 99% of us are burdened with this BS while the 1% take advantage of it.

<comment><USER6> > How many times do we have to hear these kinds of stories of abuse [...]

Well, probably more, if this type of stuff keeps getting conflated with legitimate cases of abuse and trolling. As is ... people are getting frothy about the application of the law as written.

What are you mad about? Somebody protecting their trademark? Their direct channel? Their distribution? Their customer guarantees? Their quality assurances?

Yeah - go ahead. Burn it all down. It's not like the system provided you with the cheap-ass (maybe mobile) computers via which you connect to the Internet (also cheaply) anyway...

<comment><USER5> The legal system did not provide me with computers. This post is confused.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Let's review one of the court documents because it has a very important detail. [https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/1...](https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/26/14-35035.pdf)

> Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchased Trader Joe's-branded goods in > Washington State, transported them to Canada, and _resold them there in a > store he designed to mimic a Trader Joe's store_. Trader Joe's sued under > the Lanham Act and Washington law.

Repeated later:

> It is uncontested that Defendant Michael Norman Hallatt purchases Trader > Joe's-branded goods in Washington state, transports them to Canada, and > resells them there in a store _he designed to mimic a Trader Joe's store_.

Emphasis mine and it's a big deal. Trader Joe's would have had a hell of a time bringing a suit if it would be called Hallat's Little Shack and would look like any random grocery store.

<comment><USER8> > he designed to mimic a Trader Joe's

So what? The mimicry occurs in Canada, where Trader Joe's apparently does not operate. I thought the whole point of trademark law was to prevent customer confusion, not to give a party property-like rights to some retail "style."

I'm really surprised this is an issue for the US courts at all, and that they didn't refer Trader Joe's to the Canadian court system.

<comment><USER7> > to some retail "style."

So says Wikipedia:

> Trade dress is a legal term of art that generally refers to characteristics > of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging (or even the design > of a building) that signify the source of the product to consumers.

IANAL but selling Trading Joe's products and those alone in a store that looks like Trading Joe's could at least give rise to a trade dress claim.

As to extraterritoriality, NAFTA applies, trademarks are recognized across the border.

<comment><USER9> Oh yeah it would. TJ's has a very defined, distinct, and recognizable 'feel' to its stores which are a part of their brand. If I started a grocery store called Merchant Mike's and all the employees wore Hawaiian shirts, you could bet that TJ would assert its trade dress.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Problem is it sounds like he was trying to rely on association to the Trader Joe's brand to make money, kind of a shadow franchise. That opens up the problem of brand dilution, and even the most ethical companies have to be ruthless about that, or they can lose their own brand and all the benefits they worked to build with it.

He should have realized the need, and done things like match their product mix with his own brands, work on making the store's own feel, and dampened direct association to Trader Joe's. He didn't and it bit him in the ass. No sympathy here.

<comment><USER11> The first thing I thought of was McDowells in _Coming to America_ even though they weren't reselling McDonald's food and then it turns out that the guy behind Pirate Joes is (was) planning to open a "Big M" fast food restaurant.

[http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pirate- joe-s-...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pirate-joe-s-owner- plans-big-m-fast-food-joint-1.2421233)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> There's protecting your brand, and then there's whatever the heck it is Trader Joe's did here, which seems senseless and malevolent.

<comment><USER13> Aldi Nord (owner of TJ) has done such an incredibly poor job of expanding the Trader Joe's brand outside of the USA. For example, all you get in their German stores are some random crappy products with the TJ label.

It makes so little sense to go after this tiny company when you're not even competing in Canada. Which they probably should! I'm sure there's demand in cities like Toronto for the actual unique products that TJ offers.

<comment><USER14> There is demand in Toronto. I am sitting in Toronto, and I still crave a lot of the good stuff I bought there when I lived in Seattle.

I can't believe they opened stores in Germany, but never bothered to open one in Vancouver, where there was proven demand for their products.

<comment><USER15> There are no Trader Joe's stores in Germany. It was bought in 1979 by the German family that owns the Aldi Nord chain of discount stores[0]. That German chain uses the Trader Joe's brand for some American-themed fast food ingredients, nuts, and sweet ice tea.

[0]: Which is different from the Aldi Süd chain of discount stores which runs stores under the "Aldi" brand in the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Trader Joes doesn't have a goddamn peg-leg to stand on in this dispute. If Trader Joes had made any indication whatsoever they were seeking to satisfy the clearly substantial demand for their products in Vancouver I might better be able to see their side of the story, but they have done absolutely nothing to expand into what would be ludicrously lucrative market. I know multiple people who have sent bloody hand-written letters to Trader Joes begging them to open a store in Vancouver and yet they would rather spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting a local small-business owner than satisfy the demand themselves. Regardless of the legality of this situation Trader Joes has not won the moral high ground.

<comment><USER17> Yeah, I just don't understand capitalists that actively fight against capitalizing on clear opportunities. I would have just opened a store down the street or something.

<comment><USER18> It's because legal departments are not capitalists. They're a kind of ultra- conservative entity motivated entirely by fear/anger of any perceived change.

What we have here is a COO/CEO asleep at the wheel. One of the CEOs most important jobs is to watch the legal department for signs they're about to draw the old foot-gun and start playing "this little piggy" with company toes.

<comment><USER19> No, no, no. Legal departments are fiduciaries and where the law itself is weird (as in trademark protection where companies are virtually forced to sue potential infringers) it's not their responsibility to reform the legal system.

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfeld/2013/02/28/failu...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfeld/2013/02/28/failure- to-enforce-trademarks-if-you-snooze-do-you-lose/#2923830c6c22)

 _motivated entirely by fear /anger of any perceived change_

Oh don't be such a baby, that's like saying engineering departments made up of social cripples who can't hold a conversation like regular business people.

<comment><USER20> Just because you can sue, and might win, doesn't mean you should. This was damaging to the Trader Joes brand. If I was Chief Marketing Officer of Trader Joes, I'd be demanding the Chief Legal Officer be fired.

Civil courts do not exist outside of the real world. There are consequences to how you use them.

<comment><USER19> Yes, but failure to defend a trade mark can result in the loss of legal rights thereto, _even when it 's obvious that the infringement doesn't matter._

Suppose they had shrugged this off and done nothing. Then a year later I, a rival grocer, open 'Trader Moe's' and open up 50 stores using a very similar business model to Trader Joe's. TJ sues, and my defense is that 'Pirate Joe's infringed on their mark and they did nothing, so I assumed they had abandoned their rights.

 _This is an affirmative defense in trademark law, by statute,_ specifically 15 U.S.C. § 1127 A good summary is at [http://www3.ce9.uscourts.gov/jury- instructions/node/248](http://www3.ce9.uscourts.gov/jury- instructions/node/248)

Unlike copyright and patents, trademark durations are infinite, but the price for this is that the owner must aggressively defend any possible infringement or risk a competitor claiming abandonment.

If you were the Chief Marketing Officer of Trader Joe's and I was the CEO, I'd fire _you_ for not knowing this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> While this was arguably a legally heavy-handed act on Trader Joe's part, it also seems like Mr. Hallatt became increasingly bold and antagonistic as his revenue increased.

I mean, he did change his store name to Pirate Joe's (from the far more ambiguous Transilvania Trading) and his actions seem to betray less charitable motivations than his words would lead you to believe ("This is not a business I should be doing from a personal profitability standpoint" - [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/21/pirate-joes- tr...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/21/pirate-joes-trader-joes- smuggled-canadian-border-vancouver-store.))

That said, seems like Trader Joe's missed an opportunity for a win-win partnership with someone who had already developed rudimentary logistics to meet a demonstrated demand. But then it doesn't surprise me based on my 30+ years shopping at Trader Joe's: I would never describe them as innovative, instead I'd say they are very focused on what they've been doing well for decades.

</comment><comment><USER22> Pardon my ignorance, but... why would Trader Joe's have a problem with their products being resold in Canada if they don't have a presence there? Does their parent company have a competing brand that sales are being cannibalized from?

From my perspective: every product sold in Canada was purchased in the U.S. so... if anything, this Pirate Joe fellow has provided additional sales for Trader Joes and proved that there is demand for Trader Joe's products in Canada at an incredible 40% markup!

If they're not interested in servicing Canada, would it not be to Trader Joe's advantage to enter a formal franchising or wholesaling agreement with Pirate Joe?

There must be more to this story in terms of Trader Joes objectives as opposed to Pirate Joe's methods or the legal proceedings.

<comment><USER23> I obviously can't comment from Trader Joes perspective, but did work in food safety for awhile so I can comment from that perspective.

The problem I imagine they have is that someone is selling Trader Joe products (with their label) after handling it themselves, and often having random Craiglists employees handle the items. Prior to this, Trader Joe's (or companies hired by them) are handling the products.

Imagine someone begins tampering with the food items and a few Canadians get sick or injured. This might prompt a recall of all Trader Joe's cookies, not just the ones imported into Canada for example. The FDA wouldn't be able to say that the tampering happened after the products were purchased by Pirate Joe's. The same argument applies to temperature sensitive products as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I am not a lawyer, so I don't know that I am qualified to comment on the legal issues.

I can say that this does make me upset at Trader Joe's, and I will be considering where else I can spend my money.

They could have worked with this guy, eventually set up a Trader Joe's in Canada, and then offered to let this guy run it. That would have been better for their brand, in my view.

I care about what companies do. Costco hires employees and treats them well. It pays above average, and it hires and keeps on people with disabilities and injuries, even if they can't do everything someone else can do. It makes me feel good to shop there. And it's employees are loyal, hard working, happy and friendly, and they have less pilferage then other stores.

This idea that a company has a duty to be a dick is silly. Companies should care about their brand, and about being a good corporate citizen.

<comment><USER25> So it's okay to mimic stores, down to riding on their trademark?

It's probably best to think of "What if someone cloned my favorite game and called it a slightly different name?" People had big problems with what Zynga was doing.

<comment><USER26> When they don't exist in the country, yes. Likewise, if my favorite game had georestrictions prevents its sale in some countries, I'd have no problem with Zynga selling clones for those countries.

<comment><USER25> So make your own game, with your own name. Make your own store with its own name. Don't try to tread on the name of others. It's unethical.

<comment><USER26> Claiming that actions are unethical without providing any argument is unethical.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> As much as I like to side with the little guy, I think it's pretty fair for an establishment to restrict whom they sell to (as long as it's not based on a protected class like race, gender, orientation, etc). Despite being banned from the store this guy still sought out ways to shop there, so I can't defend him too enthusiastically.

Then again it kind of annoys me that TJ's just didn't open a damn store in Canada. And if they don't want to do that then why not just look the other way while someone else took on the risk of importing their products into another country?

<comment><USER28> But they weren't restricting selling to him (in fact, I am going to guess that the manager of the store he stocked up at was happy to see the artificial lift in sales). He didn't sue them for refusing to sell to him, they sued him for infringing (which he was quite boldly, but in a country they don't actually do business in, so it seems like a stretch).

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I live in Bellingham, WA, which has (I think) the closes TJ's to Vancouver. The parking lot is already about 50% British Columbia plates, and maybe now it'll be even more. I certainly welcome more friendly neighbors shopping in town, but it's a bummer they have to shut down.

<comment><USER30> A previous article on Pirate Joe's ([http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how- why](http://www.piratejoes.ca/legalandpress/2016/1/16/how-why), also a great read) mentions that indeed Bellingham has the closest Trader Joe's to Vancouver.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Relevant episode of "Reply All" podcast: [https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate- season-3...](https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate- season-3-episode-3/)

<comment><USER32> It's Startup, not Reply All. But both are Gimlet!

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Gotta love capitalism, eh? Just like votes, more money = more protection.

This certainly wasn't a trademark issue. Trader vs Pirate. There was no question this store wasn't run by Trader Joes/Aldi North. They were buying in bulk to stock a store where they couldn't normally get the goods. Reselling should be 100% A-OK. Any trademarks go along with the products. And as far as I would guess, the grocer certainly wasn't tampering with anything - if (s)he was, they'd go out of business quick.

This is just normal SLAPP-style punitive legal actions that a large monied corporation can do to stop the little guy from doing legal behaviors that they don't like.

<comment><USER34> > Just like votes, more money = more protection.

That's what I find strange with the often-seen "well, just vote with your wallet" argument when a company screws up; it's almost literally the definition of an oligarchy (IE, more money = more decision power).

<comment><USER35> "Vote with your wallet" means hit them where it hurts, because you don't have much of an actual vote in a company's behavior. It has nothing to do with using money to subvert the democratic process.

<comment><USER36> It normalizes the behavior as acceptable. In reality, the aphorism is based on a ridiculous premise that nobody in their right mind should accept; that money is the only thing responsible for dictating what is acceptable behavior.

<comment><USER4> Uh, that's the entire premise behind the free market. Money decides who is right and who is wrong. The Invisible Hand doesn't have morals.

<comment><USER33> > Uh, that's the entire premise behind the free market. Money decides who is > right and who is wrong. The Invisible Hand doesn't have morals.

Yeah, free market. Like "I have more money, and I dont like your face, so I nuisance sue you until you're bankrupt." free market?

That's not a world I want to be part of, continue, or assist in any way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Trader Joe's is a masterclass example in branding.

The only reason anyone's surprised or outrage is that the store feels like a small, homey, good natured place full of organic this and that that's lower priced than you'd expect. That might have been true, 40 years ago. For a store that had the same name, but was a different entity entirely.

Trader Joe's now is just a giant marketing and packaging front for 70 billion dollar a year Aldi, a multinational chain. It's a corporation. None of this behavior surprises me at all.

</comment><comment><USER38> I'm not clear on how US courts were allowed to hear a case about events in Canada. Is that a thing?

<comment><USER39> A court said that since the "harm" (devaluing the trademark) happened in America, the case could move ahead. [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/court-infringement- law...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/court-infringement-lawsuit- trader-joes-pirate- joes.html?action=click&contentCollection=Business%20Day&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article)

<comment><USER40> It seems like after you buy something at point of sale whatever you do with it is fair game. I can buy Coke from Sam's Club or Costco and sell it in my restaurant. How is what Pirate Joe's did any different?

<comment><USER39> This is a trademark infringement case. The (alleged) problem is that he set up a store which billed itself as being basically a Trader Joe's.

<comment><USER41> Except he didn't. It was always clear what he was doing.

This is pretty straightforward legal bullying, in my opinion.

<comment><USER42> The guy clearly tried to position himself as a pseudo-Trader Joe's though. He called it Pirate Joes and only sold products from Trader Joe's. It seems like everyone thought of it as a kind of Trader Joe's.

Even though copyright infringement might not have been his intent, intent doesn't matter. That said, this does look like egregious legal bullying even if the case holds water.

IANAL

<comment><USER43> > It seems like everyone thought of it as a kind of Trader Joe's.

FWIW, I live 4 blocks from Pirate Joes and can tell you that no-one thought of it "as a kind of Trader Joe's".

Okay, maybe there are a few uninformed people but it's still a very long way from "everyone".

<comment><USER42> What did you think of it as? In my mind, this store is in no way associated with Trader Joe's, but sells exclusively Trader Joe's products (I've only been in it once); that made it into a kind of Trader Joe's.

I think this debate is more about how one can define "kind of Trader Joe's" than about how one associated it with the company.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> That's really too bad. Pirate Joe's fit nicely into our cultural tradition of thumbing our noses at the Americans.

</comment><comment><USER45> I'm surprised Trader Joe's hasn't gone to Amazon yet to have all of these listings removed yet... [https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search- alias%3...](https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search- alias%3Daps&field-keywords=trader+joes)

<comment><USER23> Have them removed? They are the seller.

>by Trader Joe's

<comment><USER46> The "by" line in the Amazon listing refers to the manufacturer. The sellers in the linked example have names like "TopPicks" and "South Side Enterprises" (and are probably doing what Pirate Joe did, but without crossing national boundaries, for a customer base of people like me* who live 1.5 hours drive from the nearest TJ's but like the products). TJ doesn't officially sell online.

*I've never actually patronized any of these sellers, but I've been tempted.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Assuming that taking care of customs duties and other food quality issues legally would not be that expensive, all I'm seeing is missed revenue.

If the person wants to order 10,000 palettes of cookies at retail price, why wouldn't you sell the cookies to the person? He's not stealing from the back of the store, he's paying full price. I'm very confused why Trader Joe's would not have created a direct connection with the guy.

This reminds me of major services cutting off API access because they thought they could do it better in-house. Just HIRE the person doing your own service better in a different way.

</comment><comment><USER48> Is Trader Joe's that much better than anything else Canada has to offer?

<comment><USER49> Trader Joe's is different from other stores, not necessarily better or worse. When I lived in California, we did a lot of shopping at Trader Joe's, but you couldn't really get all of your groceries there. Conversely, you could not get equivalents to a lot of Trader Joe's products at other stores. Canada has grocery stores that are 100% equivalent to regular grocery stores in the U.S., but it has nothing that is really equivalent to Trader Joe's.

<comment><USER19> Traditionally _groceries_ refers to foodstuffs only. Hence the creation of the word _supermarket_ where groceries, household good and other things things were all sold under one roof. TJs carries a few personal care items like toothbrushes and soap but they're probably only about 2% of the shelf space in a store. They're in the food business, that's it.

<comment><USER49> When I said "groceries," I was referring to food. I wouldn't be happy having to buy 100% of my food at Trader Joe's.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> This story has always baffled me and I've never really understood where Trader Joe's comes from on this. It seems like business opportunity exists, but they're either really full of themselves, or have some other tacit reason for avoiding the Canadian market. I just don't get it, and I don't like how Trader Joe's has behaved here. Right or wrong, as a consumer, I disagree, and I'm putting this down as another reason to never go to a Trader Joe's again.

</comment><comment><USER51> "At one point, Mr. Hallatt dropped the "P" from his store sign so it read "Irate Joe's" — a signal of his determination to fight the grocery chain."

Hilarious!!!

</comment><comment><USER52> That's too bad. I loved it when they took the "P" out of their sine after Trader Joe's sued them! ("Irate Joe's")

</comment><comment><USER53> Makes sense. If it was called Pirate Pete's I would understand. The same thing happened with South Butt, which was a weaker case in my opinion.

</comment><comment><USER54> So if Trader Joes is so concerned why don't they just open up shop in Canada? I've heard the podcast about it and original articles way back and it's amazing they're shutting out a market that seems to be very welcoming.

Maybe they see Target Canada failure and are scared away by that?

</comment><comment><USER55> It's sad to see Pirate Joes go away. I don't know anyone who shopped there on a regular basis, but I do think TJ would do well in that neighborhood.

The main draw to Trader Joe's is that its part of the journey across the line. This week I'll be doing this same old routine -- pick up some packages at the mail place ($2 per package), hit up a few grocery stores for different hot sauces and staples (including condensed milk in a squeeze tube), have lunch in Bellingham, go for a walk around Fairhaven, then return home.

Trader Joe's is part of that journey, much like Target (who had a massive, depressing attempt to break into Canada). Strip away that special-trip aspect, and all you really have is another grocery store with a few exceptional items.

</comment><comment><USER56> Well, that's one way to deal with a guy who has spent the money proving the market for your product line. I think a better move would have been to take a page from Dave Thomas' (Wendy's) play book and open a Trader Joe's down the street.

</comment><comment><USER57> Trader Joe's doesn't want customers who spend a ton of money buying in bulk at full retail price. Furthermore, they clearly have no intention of expanding into a large market that desperately wants them. What kind of business is this?

<comment><USER58> TJ's clearly had a opportunity - there's pent up demand for TJ products in Canada, but instead of investing in a couple of satellite stores in Canada and some bilingual labeling, they chose to spend their money on lawyers and lawsuits.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> I generally load up a few Amazon Fresh disposable coolers with TJ products as gifts for friends in Vancouver whenever I drive up -- Kerrygold butter is really hard to get in Canada, and has much better omega 3 ratio than grain fed butter.

</comment><comment><USER20> He spent so much time and effort creating and running the store and fighting this. I mean, paying $20/hour for people to shop Trader Joes to get him goods at retail? That's so incredibly inefficient.

Why didn't he just create his own store with his own brand and mimic the Trader Joes products and aesthetic? He could buy goods in bulk at much lower prices. He doesn't have to worry (much) about legal issues or spend money on them.

Clearly demand was so high he could still get away with charging very high prices.

</comment><comment><USER60> I have just lost my appetite for Trader Joe's products.

</comment><comment><USER61> >>For one trip, he hired a couple who he said did not look like conventional Trader Joe's shoppers. They had dreadlocks, tattoos and piercings. "They looked like they just walked off the set of a Burning Man documentary," he said.

I'm sorry? Trader Joes, in at least 4 locations I've seen in California, does special signs and displays the week before Burning Man to market to Burners. Where is this writer from?

<comment><USER62> This was in Northern Washington, close to the Canadian border, and more than 1000 miles away from Burning Man.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> If I lived in Vancouver I would have an irresistible urge to start a Swashbuckler Joe's right now. If only for the mischief of it.

<comment><USER64> I'd do "Traitor Joe's"

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> Does anyone else feel like he didn't raise the money because he didn't use a sensible crowd funding site like GoFundMe?

</comment><comment><USER66> The StartUp Podcast tagged along with him a few years ago: [https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate- season-3...](https://gimletmedia.com/episode/pirate-needs-pirate- season-3-episode-3/)

</comment><comment><USER67> He could have started to make his own products in this time, and slowly replacing the Trader Joe's ones with his own.

Right now he would simply stop buying the other products while having his own brand.

</comment><comment><USER68> I live in Pirate Joe's neighbourhood. He's not running a Costco sized operation. It's a tiny little store. I wish I had 50K to fund his defense.

</comment><comment><USER69> Lawsuit aside, what was this guy thinking. What an awful business model.

</comment><comment><USER70> I'm looking at this as though Trader Joe's was a different company... say Disney. Disney goes to great lengths to work out how its products are used, packaged and distributed to not only maximize profits, but also to maintain a certain image.

If I go to DisneyWorld, purchase a Mickey Mouse doll, an take it home. I have the right to do with that doll whatever I want: burn it, give it to my daughter, or resell it at whatever price I see fit.

However, I don't believe I have to right to go - as an agent of another (presumed competitor), purchase that same doll, and then resell it in my own store. I have no resell agreement with Disney to do so. In a typical reseller arrangement, wouldn't a store (e.g. Target) have an agreement with Disney to purchase bulk product for resell, presumably at a reduced price, but also under strict guidelines as to how it could do so? For example: cannot be sold above a certain price, cannot be sold next to adult content, etc.

On a side note: I have to believe that (while not a TJ problem or related to the lawsuit) there were other issues with what Pirate Joe's was doing related to imports, possible tariffs not being adhered to, etc.

/IANAL

<comment><USER54> Disney is a really bad choice because the Disney resell market is absolutely massive. Anytime they release limited release items there's a line of people buying as much as they can just to dump it on ebay.

<comment><USER70> I picked it more as an example of a company that goes to great lengths to maintain its image and quality. And one which I think reasonable people could understand why they choose to defend that image in court if their products were used in a way that could damage it.</comment></comment></comment>


Arc: Build Apache Spark Jobs Without Code - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/tripl-ai/arc-starter <comment><USER2> What a clever framework and clever bunch of people behind this. Take it for a spin and find out for yourself just how great this is.</comment>