scoot

Except when it does. What was your point exactly? Mine was that you don’t need to root an LG TV to turn off ads. I can’t speak for other brands, yours included

I have to keep reminding myself that many people lack the attention span to read the context of the comment they’re replying to, so I should quote it to avoid confusion.

Go up one comment and you’ll see this was with respect to LG, not Samsung.

You could also just turn ads off in settings

Just configure your game console to turn on the TV/set the input.

Quite the opposite. Texturing something they know will never be seen was (at least in those days) time not spent paying attention to detail on the things that will be.

I do understand it from an artistic perspective, and who knows when and how an asset will be used in the future; but the premise doesn't appear to hold water under scrutiny.

I can't reply to DaSHacka, but just to point outat least in this country, merchants have to pay to deposit cash. Not to mention the additional cost on their side of handling it, higher insurance cost, etc. etc. Cash isn't free of transaction fees/

No need. It's an installable PWA

> do yourself a massive favor and let the PCB fab also assemble the LEDs

From the article:

What's next? ...using PCB assembly...

It took me a moment to parse that it's the "smart-home graveyard", not the "smart home-graveyard" that's getting crowded!

Apparently hyphens seem to have gone out of fashion. Please can we bring them back?

Strange article to make the front page - only two paragraphs long, and no images of the tapestry that it barely talks about.

Not to mention the title - the tapestry was embroidered, not woven (if you exclude the ground fabric, which by itself is just a piece of cloth).

> Embarrassing for them that their lawyers don't understand even the basics of trademark law

Or more likely do, but hope that you don't...

Hyster (not Hister as far as I can tell) is a registered trademark in the US. Regardless:

"The HYSTER trademark is filed in the category of Education and Entertainment Services" [0], so you can safely ignore any demands to rename, as it doesn't conflict. Embarrassing for them that their lawyers don't understand even the basics of trademark law.

Edit to clarify as some folks here are as confused as sHyster's lawyers: Trademarks are not exclusive, they're restricted to a category or categories. You can be Apple in the category of computers, but not in music if there's already an Apple in that category (unless you have $500M to spare [2]).

  [0] https://www.trademarkia.com/hyster-77843354
  [1] https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/ for a more authoritative source than [0], but it doesn't allow deep linking
  [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

I find it harsh but fair. The second paragraph reads:

"Firms like Jeppesen have offerings in this space, but Scikit-decide, together with a narrow- and wide-body fuel consumption model built by a professor at the Delft University of Technology and wind data from NOAA, offer an open source solution."

So this is being positioned as an open source alternative to commercial offerings, which clearly it is not. If instead he made the limitations clear from the outset, that this is just a demonstration of what he/the tools are capable of and that this is not in any way intended for real-world use, it would put the rest of the article into better context.

I also don't see how Scikit-decide being developed by Airbus gives OP any domain authority. I use open source tools from all sorts of commercial ventures, and know nothing about how they themselves use them, or what for.