IANAL,but naming your product S2 and mentioning in the intro that AWS S3 is the tech you are enhancing is probably looking for a branding/copyright claim from Amazon. Same vertical & definitely will cause consumer confusion. I'm sure you've done the research about whether a trademark has been registered.
It's like S3, except better because, by focusing on being a write-only data store, they can manage much more throughput and efficiency, plus your data is far more secure at rest than it is in S3.
I'm not sure whether they consulted a bad trademark lawyer or didn't consult one at all, but it wouldn't have cost that much to do so. I say this having just recently started the process of filing a trademark - the cost is about the same as buying i.e. 's4.dev' according to the domain registry's website.
Having to rebrand your product after launching is a lot more painful than doing it before launching.
Trademark law encourages companies to defend their marks. If they don’t, they may lose the trademark. So Amazon has to write these guys a letter if it wants to defend the s3 trademark.
98% of the time, law suits are just a money pit. There is zero publicity. A tiny number go viral. I don't think this is likely to be one of those times.
Most people would simply say "Amazon is right." Because Amazon is right. This is an intentional attempt to leverage their product branding to promote a new product. There is very little good here.
If this were open-source, academic, non-profit, or something like that, perhaps. A small venture trying to commercialize on some digital equivalent of Amazon's trade dress? I can't imagine anyone would care....
Even those times when someone is 100% right, usually, there is zero publicity. Right or wrong, most times I've seen, the small guy would settle with the big guy with the deep legal pockets and move on because litigating is too expensive.
In a situation like this one, your marketing spend / press coverage on the existing name is shot, links to your domain are shot, and perhaps you have an egg on your face, depending on how things play out.
I think this issue better addressed in HTML spec. Basic functionality to include html snippets files in other HTML files should be standard. What am I missing?
That’s sorta the case with frames and asynchronously loaded stuff anyway though right? I think they just consider the problem solved in practice through scripting and frames. Besides, HTML doesn’t have room for that— they need room for all the features nobody uses and cares about. XD I’ve been writing HTML to some extent for 30 years and I periodically come across shit— not even new shit— that I swear I’ve never even heard of.
I’m not sure how it could possibly make the problem worse if the problem is already endemic to modern websites in a form far more heavily used than that ever would be.
You could cache the intermediate bits. Hell you could do this right now (somewhat) by doing script src=menubar.js and the script containing document.write calls. Not great for performance.
I run a small network, but this might come across as advertising. It’s been running for 20 years now.
People come and go, but its wild how the community spirit largely remains, even with significant changes in the lifestyle of the people that have been frequenting the network for a large segment of that time.
I wonder if there should be some scaling for extreme hot/cold countries. Most of our output here in Canada must be related to heating during our 6 months of cold climate.
Electricity and heat is indeed the largest sector by emissions in Canada (about a quarter) [1]. Though depends on where you are. In BC all electricity is hydropower, and if you have electric heating, your emissions are close to zero.
Transport is also about a quarter. So Canada can indeed cut emissions in half with present day tech by fixing these two sectors. Still a long way to go.
Also note that Estonia is at 7.3t, Finland 5.6t, Sweden 3.5t (Sweden was 8.6t in 1980). So climate is not really an excuse. It is just politics.
There’s lots of inefficiencies all around in Canada. Poor insulation, too much suburbanization, not enough heat pumps. Transportation is also very inefficient (not enough public transit, too much suburbanization, not enough rail).
