Internet Explorer 6 and FireFox utilize a great deal or RAM (random access memory). I know for a fact that if you’ve got 256MB and you’re using either of these products, your computer oftentimes boggs down to an almost standstill. Is there something to be done about it????

Looks like the team at Automattic has transmitted ‘cease and desist’ emails to web sites having ‘wordpress’ in the domain name. How do I know this? It was the first story on my WP dashboard this morning! Seems as though Lorelle on WP felt compelled to speak on behalf of the WP developers. She cited a story at Blogging Pro that quotes from a cease and desist email apparently sent from someone at Automattic, Inc. The email was first quoted on Andy Wibbel’s blog and it reads:

Before we consider some potential implications of the email, I’d first like to ask whether or not Lorelle VanFossen was authorized by Automattic to publish her latest blog entry at Lorelle on WordPress. In it she writes:

She isn’t listed as an employee of Automattic, so how can she make such a pronouncement? Is she an authorized agent for Automattic?

Why do I ask? Read on!

To answer that question, we first require some background information. A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others. A service mark is the same as a trademark, except that it identifies and distinguishes the source of a service rather than a product.

The trademarks and servicemarks that Automattic is pursuing are posted at The US Patent & Trademark Office website, which provides the following:

Automattic, Inc., has filed two trademark applications on “Wordpress” in association with “[D]ownloadable software program for use in design and managing content on a website.” One application covers the word, “wordpress” and the other application covers the stylized “W” in the circle with the underlined word “wordpress” positioned next to it.

Automattic, Inc., has filed two service mark applications on “Wordpress” in association with “[S]oftware solutions, namely providing use of on-line non-downloadable software for use in enabling Internet publishing.” One application covers the word, “wordpress” and the other application covers the stylized “W” in the circle with the underlined word “wordpress” positioned next to it.

Ok, now that we’ve got an idea of the marks that they claim to own, let’s take a look at what Automattic might have to show if they plan on enforcing their claimed rights to these marks.

Infringement depends upon whether two marks are sufficiently alike so as to cause consumer confusion as to their source or origin? More specifically, infringement depends upon whether a substantial number of ordinarily prudent purchasers are likely to be misled or confused as to the source of the different products or services. Actual confusion is not necessary, just a substantial likelihood of confusion.

Have you figured out why Lorelle’s blog entry is important to Automattic yet??

Lorelle has the blog name “Lorelle on WordPress.” Additionally, her blog resides at Lorelle.WordPress.com. If she was authorized by Automattic (Note: if the guys at Automattic decide what appears on the dashboard, then it seems there was implicit authorization), then Automattic itself relied on the “WordPress” in her blog’s name and in her domain name to help make their argument that ordinarily prudent consumers will take it as an “official” pronouncement!

Get it? includes “WordPress” and those with a blog name that includes it. As far as I can tell, Lorelle VanFossen is not affiliated with Automattic in a representative capacity and as such, her blog entry is a ruse.

What I find confusing has nothing to do with the trademarks. What’s confusing is whether Lorelle was in fact authorized, or supervised by Automattic? Of course, it’s simply a theory. So I’ll simply ask….

Check back to see if we’ve gotten a response from Lorelle!

Text adventures (aka interactive fiction) provide for Player input in the form of verb-noun phrases. The earliest text adventures only allowed a single verb followed by a single noun (i.e. ‘open mailbox’). Over time, parsing strategies improved and Player input expanded to include whole paragraphs.

Text adventures were little more than an exercise in guessing an author’s vocabulary and way of thinking. Rather than playing the role of protagonist in the unfolding story, the Player played the protagonist in an entirely different story, namely “figure out what the author intended when she created the adventure.”

Think you’ve got space and time mastered? If so, feel free to send me an email when you’ve solved this 4D Version of a Rubik’s Cube type puzzle.

I’m one of those fortunate enough to lack the time to devote to such an endeavour.