Geeking Out

Why do we binge watch? One way to answer this question is to say, well, we binge on TV for the same reason we binge on food. And these psychological factors are no doubt apt. But the anthropological ones are perhaps just as useful and a little less obvious because culture is a thing of surfaces and secrets, and the anthropologist is obliged to record the first and penetrate the second to figure out what?s really going on.

The Xbox One could have been the true center of your TV universe that let you throw all those other boxes away.

Better Place's plan to create a world full of electric vehicles that swap their batteries when they run out of juice is reportedly dead.

It’s almost time. We’ve all been clamoring for more Arrested Development since its untimely demise in 2006, and after seven years it’s finally happening and we are freaking out. Now Netflix has released four tantalizingly short clips of what’s to come, and we’re just going to have to watch them in a nonstop loop until the episodes drop on Sunday. That’s assuming we make it until then. Breathe, everyone. We can do this. The clips feature Maeby (Alia Shawkat), Lindsay (Portia de Rossi), Gob (Will Arnett), Lucille (Jessica Walter), and George Bluth (Jeffrey Tambor). Should I be proud or ashamed of myself that I didn’t have to fact-check any of those names or spellings and just knew them because of how much I love AD? Both? Okay, both. And my favorite: Bees? BEES. (via The Hollywood Reporter, image via NPR) Relevant to your interests Here is your viewing party menu. You’re welcome. Maybe insert Tobias into some more movies while you’re waiting? This running gag chart should keep you pretty busy.

Were the various patent rulings of the early aughts stating that Lego couldn't trademark the shape of its bricks a blessing, or a curse? On the one hand, competition in the marketplace theoretically makes for a better product. On the other, Lego was always doing just fine thank you, and none of its imitators has ever quite managed to be as reliable in construction, though they can all stab your bare feet with equal vigor. Continue reading "Topless Toy Chest: Building the Kre-O Enterprise" >

Ron Paul just can’t win when it comes to the Internet, and really, it’s his fault in the first place. First he asked the UN, an organization he notoriously does not like, to take the domain RonPaul.com from the huge supporter base that runs it so that he can have it. Now not only has the UN ruled in favor of those supporters, but they’ve also found Paul guilty of reverse domain name hijacking. Sucks to be you, Ron. What’s “reverse domain name hijacking,” you might ask? It’s basically just a complaint filed in bad faith against the rightful owner of a domain name. RonPaul.com is currently run by an extremely fervent base of Ron Paul supporters who were reluctant to disrupt their already-existing online community to give Paul their domain when he asked for it. Instead they offered to either sell him the .com domain, or to give him the domain RonPaul.Org at no charge. For some reason Paul took this as a slight against him, and his lawyers tried to claim that the gesture was evidence of malicious intent. Or something. Maybe his lawyers don’t get the Internet, either. Paul filed an official URDP complaint with the World Intellectual Property Organization in February, attempting to sieze both the .com and the .org domain name. WIPO is one of 17 specialized agencies within the United Nations and deals primarily, as the name suggests, with the protection of intellectual property among UN member states. It’s unclear why Paul went to the UN in the first place, since it’s pretty common knowledge that he hates them. Well, it seems like the UN hates him right back, because WIPO panel had this to say: As Respondent puts it, expressing support and devotion to Ron Paul’s political ideals is a legitimate interest that does not require Complainant’s authorization or approval. Moreover, Respondent’s legitimate interest in the Domain Name is strong because the site provides a place for political speech, which is at the heart of what the United States Constitution’s First Amendment is designed to protect. In this way, the Panel is persuaded by Respondent’s arguments and evidence that Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the Domain Name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish any trademark at issue. Moreover, Respondent has submitted evidence that there are multiple, very clear disclaimers on the website to which the Domain Name links, indicating that the site is not Complainant’s official site. And that’s how you lose a dispute about a domain that contains your own name, folks. The hits didn’t stop coming for Paul, though, as the panel then decided he was guilty of reverse domain hijacking in the RonPaul.org case: Respondent has requested, based on the evidence presented, that the Panel make a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. In view of the unique facts of this case, in which the evidence demonstrates that Respondent offered to give the Domain Name to Complainant for no charge, with no strings attached, the Panel is inclined to agree. Instead of accepting the Domain Name, Complainant brought this proceeding. A finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking seems to this Panel to be appropriate in the circumstances. Is it just me, or does that statement feel kind of passive agressive? I hope it’s not just me, because it makes this whole story much more satisfying. (Domain Name Wire via Techdirt, image via Gage Skidmore) Relevant to your interests The US, Canada, and UK have refused dealings with the UN before in Internet matters Meanwhile, the UN is also really worried about terrorism online Which is not surprising, given that they’ve been hacked once before

BMW's bikes have always been an amalgamation of form and function, which makes them more purposeful than pretty. The Concept Ninety finally manages to balance the two.

New submitter kwyjibo87 writes "The World Health Organization (WHO) publicly expressed dismay yesterday concerning news that intellectual property claims were hindering research on a deadly new emerging virus. Novel coronavirus (nCoV), a member of the same viral genus as the causative agent of SARS, has claimed the lives of 22 people (out of 44 reported infected) and left both researchers and health officials scrambling to develop effective diagnostic tests in addition to possible medications and vaccines against nCoV. Now, however, claims of intellectual property on the new virus are hindering research on nCoV according to the WHO, delaying advancements on tools to prevent further spread of the infection. Stories of intellectual property rights in science hindering advancements in research, particularly in clinical applications, are nothing new; the U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments on the validity of patents on the BRCA1/2 genes and has yet to issue a decision. The issue of sharing scientific information in order to promote faster research on emerging pathogens is not limited to intellectual property — a recent article in the journal Nature highlighted a case where Chinese researchers risked having their research scooped after uploading viral sequences to a public database designed aid global scientific collaboration." Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Tomorrow sees the 30th anniversary of the release of Return of The Jedi. To celebrate, here are 30 things you might not have known about the movie.

We're only days away from the new Netflix-only season of Arrested Development, but it still can't come soon enough. Here are four clips to hold everyone over until Sunday.