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."
So, um, should the Keanu Reaves joke be about the Matrix or about Johnny Mneumonic?
"Stumble before you crawl"
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.
Then why patent part of the field before it even gets off the ground? Why not just publish the description in a journal?
We're also quite willing to license the technology to interested parties at non-gouge rates
Ah yes, that's MIGHTY generous!
If my aim is to change the world, what do I stand to gain by stifling development of my own invention?
Oh, I dunno, a few dollars from the occasional "non-gouge rate" perhaps?
I hear this a lot.. someone patents something, then when asked they say: "I patented it because I want everyone to use it!" .. "I patented it so it would become the standard!" .. etc..
That doesn't make sense to me.
" If my aim is to change the world, what do I stand to gain by stifling development of my own invention?""
ummm, MS changed the world of comuting, but I don't see them opening up there research.
Just because you want to change the world doesn't mean you don't want to control/dominate that change.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
One article stated that MSN saw a decline of 300,000 users in the first quarter of this year. Not satisfied with the number of people shitting on MSN, Microsoft now brings you the MSN Toilet!
This product opens up an opportunity for a whole new Microsoft slogan: And last but not least, Microsoft has found that deman for their steaming piles of crap far outstripps the supply, so they have come upw with a strategy to collect as much as possible. Enter, the iLoo!
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
So Verizon starts installing a bunch of WiFi hotspots that they then sell private access to. In the meantime they are also clogging up spectrum for use by private individuals. I would think this issue would become a tragedy of the commons, in that more and more people are trying to install WiFi hubs, and thus crowding the bandwith and ruining it for everyone. Since the spectrum in question is free to all, people try and profit off of it at the detriment to others.
At what point in time do they have more of a right to make money off of this while I'm trying to set up my own wireless network for personal use?
So it is a joke, but not a hoax. Either way it will never be a product. I could probably make a joke about vapourware here, but I'm too busy.
You know, at first I thought this was a good idea. People go to google to find out "objective info," not what I and some guy down the block think about it, right?
But then I started thinking maybe that's wrong. I mean what is it that makes millions of us sit up at night on the web rather than watching late-night tv? I believe that it is because there is some kinds of information that you can get on the web that you can't get on television, newspapers, magazines, or radio.
That information is simply real people speaking plainly in their own voices. Complete with lies, swear words, misunderstandings, misspellings, everything. it's completely devoid of slick, corporate, boardroom approved, focus-group tested, marketing speak. People like that, it seems. They like it enough to shut off Letterman and hang here.
If you wanted to buy a car for example you could go to the dealer showroom and listen to the sales person and read the glossy brochure. Or, you could go to an independent web discussion site to hear what owners have to say about it. Even if some of the things they say aren't true you're a lot more likely to get the straight scoop after reading a hundred posts there than you are by reading all the promotional materials the maker can throw at you.
So, given that this type of information is what makes the web a cool place to begin with, in the end maybe the real smart thing for google to do would be the opposite: the default behavior is to include blogs. You'd have to deliberately exclude them if you wanted to. An opt-out scenario.
And please excuse me for butchering the ideas of David Weinberger in his magnificent Small Pieces Loosely Joined .
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
...it was, you know, *his idea*, and that's the whole point?
He came up with this thing. He knows, apparently, how to produce it. And this is what patents were made for--not stupid business practices which are all but common sense, or software concepts with only minute differences from other software concepts, or whatever.
This is the sort of thing the patent office was meant to do: Allow people who really innovate to secure ownership of those innovations and therefore rights to money made from them later if they so choose. This is a good thing, because it prevents me from inventing the machine that does your homework for you... and having my neighbor start up a company producing those machines and make millions, not giving me so much as a dime.
My father once new a guy who invented a new gadget of some variety. I want to say it had something to do with a regulator for an airgun or something. He patented it--not a cheap proposition. But he'd invented it; it was his. A largish company in that field, shortly thereafter, copied his design to use for their own products. He innovated--they stole it. And because he'd patented it, he was able to take them to court over it, and protect his work, so that he could continue to produce that item and make his living.
There's a difference between 'using the system' and 'abusing the system'. Patents are not completely evil in and of themselves. The problem comes when the goal becomes stifling competition instead of protecting innovation.
Until then, it's all bullshit hype.
For an example of a real engineer, read this . Of course, it's the USPTO that mistakes hype for substance...at the cost of the true innovators in this country.
Howard Salis
Favorite
Now that I see the actual text, this doesn't surprise me that much.
...then the wording was made *stronger* than it really needed to be. They do this to kind of make up for any loopholes they might have left in, like the guy who builds computers for a room full of computers he's lending to a local school, and installs his copy of Lindows on each one ("hey, they're still my computers!").
Basically, they don't want you giving out LindowsOS to all of your friends for free. You can use it on any of your own computers (or computers of anyone else in your household), but no one else.
I'm guessing if enough people complain about this, they'll have to put more work into it and reduce the restrictions (but probably double the size of the text to close the loopholes...).
--
This stare intentionally left blank.
There are only 10 types of people: those who understand decimal, those who don't, and, uh, 8 other types I forget.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!