Slashdot Mirror
Slashback: Hippocampus, Matter, Blogs
Why not a quarter for 15 minutes of access? amy's robot writes "After announcing plans to do so just last week, Verizon has activated the WiFi hotspots built in to their Manhattan payphones. Here's official info and a FAQ along with a map of the hotposts. The catch: you have to be a Verizon Online subscriber to use them, but they're free if you are."
So the blogs can stop fleeing to the hills. GeekLife.com writes "Dave Winer received a note from Google PR stating 'Just want to be sure you know that there's been no consideration of removing weblogs from our index.' Seems The Register's speculation may have somehow been unfounded."
I'd rather see a patent for smart toothpaste. Wil McCarthy writes "Last week on this forum, there was some heated discussion about my nonfiction book, Hacking Matter , and specifically about the patent application included in the book's appendix. I was accused of the intellectual property equivalent of cybersquatting: patenting a speculative idea and then sitting back and waiting 'for someone to actually do the hard work of inventing a useful product before gouging them for royalties.' In this scenario, my book has a chilling effect on an entire industry, stifling innovation.
What may have been lost in the shuffle is the fact that I'm not 'just' a science fiction writer or science journalist. First and foremost I'm an engineer, and to the best of my knowledge the idea of "wellstone," or bulk programmable matter woven from fibers surfaced with quantum dots, is original to me. The patent merely codifies these facts. Also, notably, the field of quantum dot research is lively and growing, but not at all focused on materials science applications. Thus there is no extant programmable matter industry to be squelched by my efforts.
Nor have I, per the discussion, patented a device which a person skilled in the art could not produce. It's true that some embodiments of the invention require nanometer precision in three dimensions and are thus beyond present-day manufacturing capabilities, but other less capable embodiments could be produced today. I didn't provide a working model to the patent office because I wasn't required to, having filed a Provisional Patent Application prior to the RPA.
As I make clear in the book, my interest is in hastening the arrival of programmable matter as both an industry and a field of inquiry. My partner and I are presently engaged in discussions to fund the development of a prototype quantum dot fiber which would be broadly, programmably self-doping at liquid nitrogen temperatures. We're also quite willing to license the technology to interested parties at non-gouge rates, and any suggestion to the contrary is simply foolish. If my aim is to change the world, what do I stand to gain by stifling development of my own invention?"
Sorting through the evidence. CowboyRobot writes "Edward Tufte (known for his book, Envisioning Information) analyzes the Boeing explanation for the Columbia disaster, pointing out design flaws and how those flaws conceal ambiguity in the report."
Tufte's analyis is the kind that should be applied to many more situations -- he dissects the way reassuring, blandly obfuscated PowerPoint slides can be used to slip through statements that might cause justified concern if spoken in plain language.
Dr. Whonow? Mechanik writes "You may remember the previous Slashdot story about the BBC doing a Flash treatment of one of Douglas Adams's Dr. Who scripts, Shada. Just wanted to let everyone know that Part Two is now available."
Welcome to Stepford. ragingmime writes "The Boston Globe has an interesting story on the Polyphonic "hit song science" technology that Slashdot mentioned a while ago. The Globe mentions specific things that the software measures and give opinions from various people in the music industry. It's an interesting - and kinda creepy - read."
Boilerplate or camera tricks? andrel writes "In his Slashdot interview Michael Robertson answered question 10 with:
I believe that if you purchase a product, you should have the right to change it, move it, or alter it for your own personal needs. The seller should have the right to say that you void the warranty or refuse to support it if you change it, but you should still have right as the purchaser to make that choice. This goes for music, software and personal computers. [emphasis added]
Too bad Lindows.Com doesn't share his values. The license agreement for LindowsOS explicitly prohibits users from modifying it (section 1.1.a.iv for individuals and 1.1.b.iv for businesses). As for voiding the warranty, well according to section 4 there wasn't one there in the first place. The EULA also claims that you may not allow a visiting friend to use your LindowsOS computer, nor may you use it to conduct business(both in section 1.1.a.iii)."
Robertson reads Slashdot; I hope we'll see his reaction to this soon.
Imagine the course of a canoe paddled by Microsoft and SCO. SolipsistX writes "The Seattle Times is reporting that Microsoft now says that the iLoo is not a joke. Apparently, execs killed the project after it became a laughing stock. The announcement yesterday that it was a joke was caused by miscommunication, says Microsoft. Needless to say, this does not help Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing initiative."
An absolutely priceless article title. One of many that can be found on the iLoo here.
Thus there is no extant programmable matter industry to be squelched by my efforts.
The whole point is that such patents will "squelch" any burgeoning "programmable matter industry", not simply one that is already extant at the time of your patent application.
The question of what constitutes innovation versus discovery is always a difficult one. The fact is, however, that patents are not meant to protect or aid those "who figure out how to do new stuff", but rather for those "who do new stuff". We do live in a society with a penchant for materialism; as thus, the "ideas behind something cool" are valued much less than that actual "something cool".
Thoughts?
The iLoo, WAS a real idea, not a hoax as previously stated. However, MS's PR department fscked it up, and announced it as a hoax.
It is not USC-LA, it is just USC, the University of Southern California.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
Sounds like the record companies want to move another step closer to Orwell's 1984, where music was automatically generated for the proles by a machine called the versificator.
Is this why Big Brovahz had a hit single recently?
What is the inverse of the Matrix?
For the record, this is really whacked.
a. Family License: If You are a Family or Individual, You agree to the following terms of this Section 1.1.a: LindowsOS is a modular operating system made up of individual software components (each individual software component and all accompanying documentation, enhancements, upgrades and extensions thereto are referred to herein as "Software Program(s)") that were created either by Lindows or various individuals and entities ("Third Parties"). Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Lindows grants You a non-exclusive license to use the object code form of LindowsOS for Your personal use in accordance with the accompanying documentation. You may download and use LindowsOS on multiple computers owned, leased or rented by You; provided, however, You and members of Your Household (a "Household" consists of those individuals that currently reside with You) are the only individuals with the right to use Your licensed copy(ies) of LindowsOS. For example, if You have a desktop computer at home and a laptop computer which You travel with, You may download a copy of LindowsOS on both machines for the personal use of members of Your Household and You. You agree that You are responsible for the members of Your Household's compliance with the terms of this Agreement as though they were You and had agreed to all terms and conditions herein. Except as otherwise expressly set forth herein, You may not (and shall not allow any member of Your Household or any other Third Party to) (i) remove any product identification or other notices; (ii) copy LindowsOS (other than for back-up purposes, for Your personal use on Your multiple machines as set forth in this Section 1.1.a, or for archival purposes); (iii) provide, lease, lend, use for timesharing or service bureau purposes or otherwise use or allow others to use LindowsOS to or for the benefit of Third Parties, or (iv) modify LindowsOS or incorporate LindowsOS into or with other software, except as may be provided for in this agreement.
I have no pants and I must scream
Which would not be the case if the slides had been created with Agnubis or Impress.
</sarcasm>
You're right. Obviously, it is possible to create crappy presentations using any given product - just as it is possible to write crummy code in any programming language.
However, you miss one of Tufte's main points. There are many, many ways to produce high-quality technical documents (I prefer TeX/LaTeX). There are even multiple ways to produce overhead-projector or LCD-screen presentations (see LaTeX slides, or the Prosper package). Packages that are designed to work with variables, equations, and scientific notation, would have done a better job with this presentation than (what looks like) PowerPoint did.
They would have made it easy for the authors to use a consistent, clear notation for the "cubic inches" unit measure that is crucial to their analysis. At the very bottom of the slide, they reveal that the piece of foam that struck Columbia was 640 times the size of the foam chunks they experimented with on the ground! As it is, they refer to this unit as "cu in" several times but each time the unit, as plain text, blends into its surroundings rather than associating itself with the accompanying number.
Have you ever tried to write an equation in PowerPoint? PITA. Now of course, ideally the Boeing engineers would have put in boldface 18-point font at the bottom of the slide that they did not want to extrapolate their test results by a factor of 640. But in the absence of this honorable impulse, a technically-minded presentation package would have made it easier for them to present the critical information in an readily-digested manner (and may even have warned them against using all those single-item sublevels).
As it is, any time they wanted something other than plain, bulleted text, they were working against the grain of their software. Who knows if it made the critical difference (I doubt it), but please recall that we are talking about 7 lives and several billion dollars here.
-renard
Do you also pronounce "nuclear" as "nucular"?
Please get a dictionary. And please use it.
Timothy,
This was the EULA our lawyers put together a year ago when Michael and I were buried trying to get LindowsOS off the ground. Now that we are up and running, Michael and I will go through this and review it. I think you've pointed out some good areas that probably don't really fit with what we're trying to do and could use some updating.
Thanks,
Kevin Carmony
President, Lindows.com