@SjoerdCdeVries I think the crux of it is that copyrights/trademarks are not like patents; prior art is not a consideration. The main problems are when a logo is sufficiently similar to another that it might create confusion, and that in order to retain rights over something you have to actively defend them and not just let others copy or modify your trademarks as they see fit.
@Rojo the odd thing is that all of this user's questions so far ask for formulae or code in some other language. This being the case, why ask them here?
@RM my point is I don't think WRI would sue what will probably become one of the major forums for Mathematica support over something like a similar-looking logo. What benefit would there be in that for them? So saying no makes their lives easier and ours more difficult but if someone else with some authority in WRI (e.g. Conrad Wolfram, Theodore Gray, both of whom seem like quite reasonable people) had asked them to say yes the outcome might have been different.
@OleksandrR Reasonable people become unreasonable when it comes to protecting trademarks and patents. I'm bummed, but I don't blame them for fiercely protecting what's theirs. It might have been different, say, had you organized a free mma training for school students or something. There is no monetary involvement, is temporary in time, etc. But here, SE is a for-profit corporation that stands to (potentially) make money and fame by using something very close to what they've trademarked.
I like the spikeyness and the vibrant colours. We might have to abandon the hyperbolic pentagon, but we can try other options. I dislike the knot a lot — it is extremely generic and quite frankly, hard to relate it to mathematica
@RM you definitely can't blame the lawyers themselves; by saying no they're just protecting their clients' interests in the way that is least effort for them. I highly doubt they had heard of Mma.SE before. But even the slightest buy-in from someone high up at WRI (a few positive words about the site) could have tipped the balance of the best interest judgement from "no" to "yes".
Yes, I agree. I suppose though we can't really be sure what WRI thinks of this site officially. What is pretty clear to me is that the answers one gets here are better than will normally come from Premier Support, which I suppose they have an interest in continuing to sell.
@SjoerdCdeVries yes, and that is a good reason to buy it, of course. But I think that's not how they like to sell it: rather they say you can just ask any question and get expert advice.
@RM it's been a while since I had an active Premier Service account and I never asked any questions, so I don't know. :) I think consultancy is beyond the scope of PS, but for any other questions, it seems they will usually oblige.
What's their turnaround time? I reckon there's some support guy sitting at the computer and I wonder if it might be faster for him to ask on mma.se and get back to the customer than solving it himself
The problem with mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/8327/… is probably the definitions before the DynamicModule, right? Wouldn't that be the generisable problem @rojo et al. were looking for?
@Rojo one would think so. On the other hand, the real question may be how they regard a growing community that they have no control over. For example, you can't compare to (or even mention) other products on MathGroup.
@belisarius maybe ugly and hideous spikey is the way to go... then we can be like — "You think this looks like your logo? Are you saying Michael Trott has terrible taste in graphic design?" to their lawyers
@Rojo yes, I agree. Definitely we are not out to cause any harm to WRI (quite the opposite). But whether or not their strategy incorporates or allows for sites like this is another matter.
but chat rep counts all accounts, unlike the flair which counts sites with 200+ rep. So technically, you could get ~9k for free if you just created an account on each site
In version 7 there exist these Internal` context functions:
?Internal`*Periodical*
AddPeriodical Periodicals RemovePeriodical $ThisPeriodical
In a comment to this answer Szabolcs stated that these "seem to provide very similar (the same?)...
BTW I think if we have a seven-pointed logo, the accepted answer should be a light green flat mildly stellated six-pointed star. The badges will be 3, 4 and 5 points, so the theme is "slightly pointy" rather than "five points". Even less Mma-logo-ish
@belisarius I don't care how it's done. It seems like it should be possible to make v7 compatible with the v8 functions but since I don't have v8 I cannot compare them.
@belisarius I guess I overlooked that. Still, if you are willing to put together everything you've found out and make as much as possible of the v8 functions work on v7 I will start the bounty.
@MrWizard I am looking at v7 docs, and I am afraid that there is a lot of functionality missing in the implementation. One should create a full emulation shell to be able to use v8 functionality. It is not only a matter of translating function arguments, but setting up data structures and triggers. Something like a 2 days work, I believe.
@belisarius Ouch. I had no idea, really. I'll settle for hacking out my own little alarm applications and the like. Seriously, please don't put more work into it; v7 is becoming an antique.
I'm not certain these should be merged. If they are, I feel that pattern-matching should be the master.
It is used preferentially: 54 versus 15 questions at this time
It is not easily confused with design patterns
pattern-matching is at the heart of Mathematica; not having such a tag seems wro...
Well, it all depends on the level of similarity you want, but I think something reasonable can be done in another half hour. I was worried about the repetition limits, but it can be done
Now, the meta, brb
I think I'm for merging patterns into pattern-matching
Yeah, I don't think the complication is worth it, and I woulnd't be sure what question about patterns isn't indirectly about making apattern that matches
My solution is a recursive tree traversal algorithm which seeks and searches neighbouring vertices only if it will lead to a word (e.g., Something starting with ZQ is immediately disqualified), but it's faster than yours because I construct the adjacent vertices list from the adjacency matrix rat...
@Rojo I think we should ask Mr. about what is he planning to do with the scheduledtasks thing. I pondered about a full implementation, and it is really hard. You are saying it is "easy". I believe we are talking about different objectives.
.jpg/250px-Donald_Duck_-_The_Spirit_of_%2743_(cropped_version).jpg)
In version 7 there exist these Internal` context functions:
?Internal`*Periodical*
AddPeriodical Periodicals RemovePeriodical $ThisPeriodical
In a comment to this answer Szabolcs stated that these "seem to provide very similar (the same?)...
