Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: Transparency, USB, Europatents

Slashback with a followup on the perpetual motion DeLorean, a word on RIAA bank-account-jacking, a reminder about the fast-tracked vote on software patents in the EU, the real meaning of "high speed USB" and more. Read on below for the details.

Now even less than a week ... mpawlo writes "As reported by Greplaw, although I am still looking for further confirmation, it seems like the EU vote on software patentability has been moved from the late fall to June 30, 2003. Yes, that is in one (1) week. If you have more information and another source - please comment on this news item."

Mikael writes: "Personally, I find it somewhat disturbing from a democracy perspective that this proposal seems to be fast-tracked in the middle of the summer, when most Europeans want to focus on whether they should have strawberry or vanilla ice cream. In Sweden, we also got our Swedish version of the DMCA this week. I guess the ice cream will have to wait."

DoSthAboutIt points out that "A 'Petition for a Free Europe without Software Patents' has gained more than 150000 signatures. Among the supporters are more than 2000 company owners and chief executives and 25000 developpers and engineers from all sectors of the European information and telecommunication industries, as well as more than 2000 scientists and 180 lawyers. Companies like Siemens, IBM, Alcatel and Nokia lead the list of those whose researchers and developpers want to protect programming freedom and copyright property against what they see as a 'patent landgrab.' The whole article can be found here, including some statistics like signatories by country"

The story of Peng. mantispraying writes "Looks like the college student who settled with the the RIAA for $12,000, his entire life savings, has recouped all of his money thanks to a very generous file sharing community. Also, the search engine he created that got him in trouble is back online, for demonstration purposes only, of course."

Reader T points out that while one of the students who lost his life savings to RIAA has made it back through PayPal donations, "the other, Dan Peng, is still short about $12,000. Brother, can you spare a dime?"

I'd prefer the garrote and the stick, but hey. Mark Ferguson writes: "I attended the FTC spam forum. It seems I was on their call list :-) I parlayed that into getting several others on the panels as well. While there I spoke with bulk emailers and other industry folks. Some people defined Confirmed OPT-IN to mean you sending a confirmation that the email address was subscribed so they were doing double, confirmed OPT-IN.

My heads spins.

What I figured from what I learned was these folks truly refused to accept real definitions the Service Providers have been using for years so I decided to do a site for just this. ... Anyway, reboot, aka Andrew Cockrell myself and another built The Carrot and the Stick to explain email, define the best practices and to get people to abide by them.

Thoughts, comments and/or suggestions?"

Sooner or later, that DeLorean's going to land someone in jail. hackwrench writes "According to channel WSMV news, Alternate Energy Inventor Carl Tilley's compound was raided. Tilley was previously mentioned on Slashdot here."

Tilley had announced the then-upcoming demonstration of his perpetual-motion DeLorean.

My nanodots can fit inside your nanodots! Rocky Rawstern writes "I recently had the distinct pleasure to interview one of my favorite authors, Wil McCarthy. Upon completing three of his latest books - two sci-fi and one work of non-fiction - I realized that others would probably enjoy his ponderings as much as I. The questions for this interview stem from my own interest in programmable matter, and the awe-inspiring possibilities raised by Wil in his book Hacking Matter."

How to succeed (not necessarily) in business. jameshowison writes "A few months ago Ask Slashdot published Kevin Crowston's question on what makes open source software successful ... well the results are in and the paper typed. We ran the responses through a funky content analyser (called Grad Students). The metrics that academics and the industry have used for years simply don't work for OSS.

More and more it seems that we'll need to survey the number of job offers developers get and the size of the community to get at this one ..."

You sound very familiar to me. Interested Observer writes "Thanks to a slashdot article discussing false positives using Soundex I thought if Soundex can be used for something as important as "no-fly" lists then certainly we should be able to get some entertainment value out of it! See if your Soundex last name-counterparts show up in a Google News search."

A member of the USB-IF Administration writes to dispel the confusion raised by the seeming conflict between many USB products' labels and their actual data-transfer speeds:

"The source of confusion derives from the fact that USB specification revision numbers and data-transfer rates are often being used in place of the logo on consumer packaging, a purpose for which they were not originally intended. The USB-IF's recommended nomenclature for consumers is 'USB' for slower speed products (1.5 Mb/s and 12Mb/s) and "Hi-Speed USB" for high-speed products (480Mb/s), as signified in the USB logos that were introduced in late 2000. In short, consumers wishing to be certain they are getting the performance they paid for in their USB products can use the logo for clarification.

The USB-IF's naming and packaging recommendations for low- or full-speed USB products, as listed at the website http://www.usb.org/developers/packaging, state that such products can carry only the basic version of the USB logo, which simply states "Certified USB." We state clearly that manufacturers should avoid using terminology such as USB 2.0 Full Speed, Full Speed USB or USB 2.0. These formal recommendations were published to the USB-IF membership and posted on the website in August 2002.

The USB-IF is a nonprofit industry organization. We do not and cannot control how manufacturers label their products. We do work continuously with system and peripheral manufacturers, striving to provide consistency in the use of this nomenclature and the logos. The logo indicates that a product's performance against and conformance with the standard have been tested, and that the product has passed the USB compliance program.

Anyone having questions about the performance of a product should contact the manufacturer for clarification.

For a brief Q & A on this topic, please visit our website at http://www.usb.org/info/usb_nomenclature."

327 comments

  1. Of course his "compound" was raided by winkydink · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anytime you call something a compound, the government raids it. He should have called it a campus, or research park, or something

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    1. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by JasonMaggini · · Score: 1, Funny

      "In this country, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"

    2. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by realdpk · · Score: 5, Funny

      He also made the mistake of calling his device an "energy machine". He should have called it "Weapons of Mass Destruction". His compound would still have been raided, but at least they wouldn't have found anything.

    3. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it only gets called a "compund" after or immediately before it gets raided? Who do you hear calling those things "componds"? Right, the new after the FBI has or has made plans on invading it :)

    4. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by YodaToad · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, if he'd have named it a research park the government would have probably funded him, not raided him.

    5. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Quiet you! I'm trying to get a space elevator funded!

    6. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by Phanatic1a · · Score: 1

      They haven't raided the Kennedy Compound yet.

      Perhaps they're scared of what they might find...

    7. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by mrmeval · · Score: 1

      Did he call it a compound? I don't remember any place raided in recent memory other than in Iraq to be called by the people there a compound.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    8. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I remember hearing a story that a deranged gentleman at one point did raid the Kennedy compound, armed with a ladder. He later told the police that he thought his "wife was in there".

      Well, you know those Kennedys...

    9. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      According to the article, Tilley has a complex.

    10. Re:Of course his "compound" was raided by RancidBeef · · Score: 1

      I don't know. They refer to the Kennedys' place as the Kennedy Compound but it doesn't get raided. Maybe that's the exceptiont that proves the rule?? :-)

  2. Software patent report postponed by Sanity · · Score: 5, Informative
    I just received an email today from someone involved in this saying that "the meeting of the Secretary generals has postponed the report till September". Apparently it will now happen some time between the 1st and the 4th of September - which gives us more time to educate our MEPs.

    If you are an EU citizen and care about this don't wait for other people to take action - contact your MEP and make sure they are familiar with the issues! You can read my email to my MEP in my /. Journal and you are welcome to borrow ideas from it if you like.

    1. Re:Software patent report postponed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't they be Secretaries General?

    2. Re:Software patent report postponed by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

      Minor point, which may only be of interest to the pedants out there but the plural of Secretary General isn't Secretary Generals, it's Secretaries General.

      Why so? Because they are secretaries, not generals.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    3. Re:Software patent report postponed by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's a quirk in the language. Adjectives almost always come before nouns (AN). This is one of the few exceptions. In fact, NA is so rare in English (at least in the US it is) that just about everybody will forgive you if you treat NA phrases as "compound nouns".

      The only other example I can think of is "court martial". "Will there be court martials for those pilots?" makes perfect sense even if "courts martial" is correct.

      I mean, what are we? French?

      IIRC, some official from the US Navy said a while ago that ships would no longer be "she" and would instead be "it" as most inanimate objects in English have no gender.

      That suits me fine as well. Although gendered pronouns for inanimate objects lend a picturesque quality to speech as in "She's gonna blow!", I wouldn't want them to be as important to English as they are to the continental European languages. Calling your ship "she" is nice as an option, if you want to convey romance or quaintness; but the last thing I want is somebody correcting me for calling it an "it".

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    4. Re:Software patent report postponed by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      From what I hear though, there is little to fear. The EU patents on software won't allow any patenting of business methods (no one-click patent unless you describe a very specific way of programming it).

      The only thing which is still in danger is the fact that innovative methods of whatever might be patented...which I don't mind, as long as the lenght of the patent is reasonable (one or two years should be sufficient in the world of software).

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    5. Re:Software patent report postponed by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      Haven't you noticed? English AND american aren't consistent at all! It's one and all quirk; just ask anyone who's had to learn it :)

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    6. Re:Software patent report postponed by davFr · · Score: 1

      I've already read this piece of news here (in French), with a statement from an eu deputy:
      http://linuxfr.org/2003/06/26/13053.html

      --
      RIP Slashdot. I used to love you. dead account - but slashdot wont let me delete it.
    7. Re:Software patent report postponed by Halo1 · · Score: 4, Informative
      From what I hear though, there is little to fear. The EU patents on software won't allow any patenting of business methods
      That's what McCarthy wants you to believe, yes. However, her amendments say otherwise:
      Accordingly, a computer-implemented business method or other method in which the only contribution to the state of the art is non-technical cannot constitute a patentable invention.
      Now, whether or not something is "technical" is defined as whether or not something makes a "technical contribution". However, technical contribution is nowhere defined in the proposal! It only says:
      The technical contribution shall be assessed by considering the state of the art and the scope of the patent claim considered as a whole, which must comprise technical features, irrespective whether or not such features are accompanied by non-technical features.
      Now, that's really clear, isn't it? Surely, this non-definition won't be abused by anyone. Regarding your one-click example: the commission is not even sure itself whether or not it would be possible in the new proposal (see this FAQ, search for click).

      Anyway, things are looking actually quite good currently. Have a look at this press release, most MEPS are finally seeing that the proposal is completely wrong. I'm in direct contact with several people working with the MEPS and these people are really eager to learn as much as possible about the dangers of software patents.

      --
      Donate free food here
    8. Re:Software patent report postponed by steelneck · · Score: 3, Informative

      I can verify this, I also got a mail today from a Swedish MEP (Olle Schmidt) that said:

      Concerning JURI Committee reports for next's week plenary, please find below the modifications of the agenda adopted by the Conference of Presidents:

      First, for your information, to confirm that the McCarthy report on patentability of computer-implemented inventions will be in the agenda for the September plenary (doc A5-238/2003) and not now.
    9. Re:Software patent report postponed by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 1

      One of the MEPs I wrote to sent back a form letter, from which I quote:

      The European Parliamentary Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (JURI) will be assessing and voting on the Directive on Wednesday, but the legislation will come before the Parliament in June and can be revised or even dropped altogether.

      I think that "Wednesday" actually means the Wednesday already gone.

      Anyway, the letter confirms that the UK's Liberal Democrats are against the change, which is a start.

    10. Re:Software patent report postponed by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 1

      The term "technical contribution" is defined in article 2 as "a contribution to the state of the art in a technical field which is not obvious to a person skilled in the art."

      Article 3 then requires that "a computer-implemented inventions is considered to belong to a field of technology". Which just leaves the obviousness test, and the EPO seems incapable of applying that.

    11. Re:Software patent report postponed by Everybody · · Score: 1

      The only thing which is still in danger is the fact that innovative methods of whatever might be patented...which I don't mind, as long as the lenght of the patent is reasonable (one or two years should be sufficient in the world of software).

      Why do you think the EU Parlament would limit the duration a time is valid especially for software patents? The law does not discriminate between normal patents and software patents - it's just that patents will eventually be granted for software.

      So there is a lot to fear for independent and open source developers. And there'd be a lot to celebrate for patent attorneys and corporations like IBM with thousands of software patents.

    12. Re:Software patent report postponed by MickLinux · · Score: 1

      Is there a way to recall Arlene McCarthy? Or are recall votes out? I really think that a recall vote would be appropriate, and would send a definite message, quite effectively.

      At least in America, the socialists and the conservatives would have you think that they are not one and the same party. I think they are, and perhaps the same is true in Europe.

      --
      Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    13. Re:Software patent report postponed by Halo1 · · Score: 1

      I don't know whether there is such a thing as a recall vote in the European parliament (I don't even know what a recall vote is in the US). Regarding the socialist/conservatives: there are a lot more political factions than just socialists and conservatives. There's at least socialists, Christians, greens, nationalists and liberals. Greens and socialists are generally progressive, the rest conservative, but it's certainly not always that simple.

      --
      Donate free food here
    14. Re:Software patent report postponed by nickos · · Score: 1

      I just got this back from my local Tory MEP:

      Thank you for your email referring to the result of the recent Legal Affairs and Internal Market Committee vote on the Patentability of Computer Implemented Inventions. I have been in contact with my colleague Malcolm Harbour, who is the Conservative Spokesman on the Internal Market and a member of the Committee, to discuss this matter.

      Conservatives in the European Parliament have supported the objectives of the Directive to set out and defend the status quo in Europe following changes to the patent system in the USA and also planned for Japan. There is a clear intention across the EU Member States to see that Europe does not follow the USA and Japan in allowing widespread patent availability for software and business methods. Copyright will remain the principal method of protecting intellectual property in these cases. Conservative MEPs support the general line that the Commission has taken which builds on and clarifies the existing patent law across the European Union and makes it clear that only software which forms part of a technological process will be patentable. This will allow patents to be provided for genuine technical inventions and stimulate European economic development in areas of economic strength like mobile telephony, digital television and computer controlled machine tools to name just a few possibilities.

      The amendments agreed by the Legal Affairs and Internal Market Committee last week, and supported by Conservative MEPs, have clarified the test conditions for software (deciding whether it has a technical effect) before authorising a patent. The Parliament amendments improve the text while ensuring that its principles are supported. Codification of the existing position will also avoid raising complicated issues of the validity of existing patents across Europe or allowing current unpatentable technologies to claim new patents. This will allow European businesses the chance to develop ideas with certainty as to their legal position. It will also reduce the pressure from companies holding permissive American software patents who wish to gain an extension of their patent rights in Europe.

      Finally, I must point out that the Directive contains detailed provisions for review of its operation and for early revision should its provisions not work as intended. If it is clear, from the type of inventions being patented or from ongoing legal cases, that the goals of outlawing generic software patents are not being met, then a process of revision can be implemented quickly.

      Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any further assistance


      How do my fellow slashdotters think I should respond?

    15. Re:Software patent report postponed by Halo1 · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I missed that during my quick look. I did think I had seen it somewhere, but I couldn't find it anymore. Anyway, as you say, those two definitions completely void the extra requirement of making a "technical contribution".

      --
      Donate free food here
    16. Re:Software patent report postponed by Sanity · · Score: 2, Insightful
      clarifies the existing patent law across the European Union and makes it clear that only software which forms part of a technological process will be patentable.
      Point out that a "technological process" could be stretched to include virtually anything, and that this language will be totally ineffective in preventing patents on trivial software processes.
      This will allow patents to be provided for genuine technical inventions and stimulate European economic development in areas of economic strength like mobile telephony, digital television and computer controlled machine tools to name just a few possibilities.
      Explain that there have been no economic studies whatsoever which indicate that permitting software patents will stimulate innovation, while almost every analysis of the effects of software patents have concluded that they damage competition and innovation. One good example is the Fraunhofer Institute for Innovation Research study (http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/bmwi-fhgmpi01/index. en.html).

      It isn't just academics that recognise the harmful effects of software patents. Who would know more about this issue than Bill Gates who said:

      If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today. ... The solution is patenting as much as we can. A future startup with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose. That price might be high. Established companies have an interest in excluding future competitors.
      The basic issue is that the software industry has thrived without software patents, and where they have been applied - they have only served to slow innovation and inhibit competition. European software developers need to be protected from software patents, not protected by them.
    17. Re:Software patent report postponed by nickos · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that. I'd already used that Bill Gates quote in my original email, but I think I'll use it again in my reply. God knows if the MEPs themselves actually read these things, or whether their secretaries just send out the relevant form letter reply. So far the Green have been the most prompt and supportive of our views. I'm still waiting for a number of MEPs to reply, the Labour ones being most notable by their absence...

  3. Perpetual motion by agrippa_cash · · Score: 3, Funny

    Investigators from the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance raided the Tilley complex and wer head to say "In this state we obey the laws of PHYSICS!"

    1. Re:Perpetual motion by LeoDV · · Score: 1

      But Cap'n, I canna change the laws of physics!

  4. tilly's woes by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This will be interesting.... as they will either announce to the world that it was all a scam, or in the court cases that will ensue, the entire process/design will become public and the world will change overnight....

    but the way this crackpot acted..... I'm interested how devilish his scam was....

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:tilly's woes by Cryptnotic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      He's not going to admit it was a scam. He was taking lots of money from private investors, telling them that he had this new magical source of energy. The amounts probably total in the millions of dollars. If he publicly admitted misleading investors, then he would be instantly convicted of fraud and go directly to jail (after a brief trial, of course). He is granted a right to not be forced to incriminate himself (the 5th amendment).

      However, there was a great suspicion that he has been committing fraud (magic isn't real). Therefore, the government goes in to gather evidence against him. They'll come up with enough evidence, try the guy for fruad, and hopefully send him to jail. The people who gave the crackpot money will still be out of luck though.

      --
      My other first post is car post.
    2. Re:tilly's woes by cristofer8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Alternately, once he discovers that his scam is about to be busted, he raids his own compound and cries that he couldn't finish his research because it's all been stolen. He then promply moves to the bahamas.

    3. Re:tilly's woes by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      I'm sure it ran on the same magical dreams and fairys that the rest of the late '90 dotcoms did. Perhaps the economy failed because he was burning those magical dreams and fairys to fuel his car.

      Now that this resource has been depleted, I'd like to point to a vast and as-yet untapped supply of crushed dreams, disillusionment and worthless stock options. While that's not as clean a fuel source, there's enough of it there to fuel the USA well into the next century.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    4. Re:tilly's woes by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

      The Sailor Scouts will put a stop to your evil plan, Greyfox-ite.

    5. Re:tilly's woes by IronChef · · Score: 1

      If he publicly admitted misleading investors, then he would be instantly convicted of fraud...

      IANAL, so I ask: is it fraud if you are genuinely deluded? Always been curious about that.

    6. Re:tilly's woes by IICV · · Score: 1
      If you are genuinely deluded, then you can be considered to not be in your right mind and any contracts made with you are voided.

      Essentially, you have to give the money back, but you get to live in a room with soft walls. They even provide these stylish jackets and blunt eating utensils! Score!

    7. Re:tilly's woes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are genuinely deluded, you aren't going to build a demonstration device that fakes doing what you claim it does.

    8. Re:tilly's woes by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily true, if you were sufficiently deluded the reasoning might go something like "well, I know it ought to work, I obviously havn't got the details quite right yet... but since it will work very soon I might as well pretend that the device is working now, which will keep the investors happy".

    9. Re:tilly's woes by rockhome · · Score: 1

      Honeslty, I hade charlatans as much as the next guy, but this really speaks to weaknesses in the intelligence of investors.

      I am sure that most reasonably intelligent people who were awake when their HIGH SCHOOL physics teachers waxed poetic on the 2nd Law were sceptical about Tilley's claims. It is the Free Lunch axiom. So why did Tilley's investors not require some concrete information regarding this "magic box".

      If any of these investors spent 5 minutes researching his claims, they should have realized that there is no such thing as a free lunch. This is not a Star Trek universe where dS can be negative and quantum effects are randomly applicable.

      I say Caveat Emptor if you are stupid enough to believe a scheister like this.

    10. Re:tilly's woes by sckienle · · Score: 1

      Well, maybe the investors are looking for a tax write off? I know of one case where a Bank manager, actually he started the bank and managed it, was fired because the bank was making money!

      --
      I don't see things in black and white; I see the gray. Heck, I actually see in color, which makes things more difficult
    11. Re:tilly's woes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      magic isn't real

      ObPythonReference:

      "She turned me into a newt. I got better."

  5. "Magic Box" by jagilbertvt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can he not show us the inside of the box because then the cat will be dead?

    1. Re:"Magic Box" by The+Unabageler · · Score: 2, Funny

      probably

      --
      perl -e '$_="\007/4`\cp%2,".chr(127);s/./"\"\\c$&\""/gees; print'
    2. Re:"Magic Box" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That's uncertainly funny.

    3. Re:"Magic Box" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You can have my magic box, for 100 -- English pounds"

    4. Re:"Magic Box" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nooooooo ..... Too much!

  6. Open Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    I support jobs for US software engineers. Hence, I do not support open-source.

    Time to look at the people that support the OSS movement, guys. They are all very much left-wing, and are all acting under the orders of foreign governments. They are seeking to undermine our American way.

    I used to run Linux, but never again. A chill wind blows through this country, and its name is 'open-source'.

    Think about it.

    1. Re:Open Source by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 1

      Time to look at the people that support the OSS movement, guys. They are all very much left-wing, and are all acting under the orders of foreign governments. They are seeking to undermine our American way.

      I don't care much for liberals, but what do foreign governments have to do with anything??

      If anything, foreign governments might adopt open source en-masse, putting OSS in the majority position (globally).

      What will this do? It will cause closed source software vendors to "shape up or ship out". Thats right pal, OSS will spawn better closed source products. It's win-win.

      --
      I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
    2. Re:Open Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're a moron. yanks are so effing arrogant that they think they are the best in the world, and the only country in the world with smart people. america forgets it's humble roots as the poorest and cast offs of "old Europe", You still have no culture, no class, no style, and no cuisine. Your cars suck, and your women all look like whores.

    3. Re:Open Source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  7. If its real... by k03+blister · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If it is real, will he have legal grounds to take against the govt dept's of TN to recoup lost technologies. If so, is there a legal limit? For example, if it was real, and he wasn't generous about his technology, he would easily be one of the richest men on Earth.

    Can he sue them for a few trillion dollars?

    Its probably not real, but the implications of it being an actual working device are astronomical.

    --
    k03 - ne
    1. Re:If its real... by Speedy8 · · Score: 1

      You can't really sue the government for loss unless they want to let you.

    2. Re:If its real... by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      Screw that; if it where real (and it can't, as sure as this sentence exists) he can do all the work again and still be a millionaire.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    3. Re:If its real... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      yeah! Sounds like a great investment doesn't it?!?!?

      Maybe you could wire your life savings to my special swiss bank account I've set up for investors... I'll take real good care of it -- just make sure you e-mail me your name, SS#, and address and how much you sent me so I can keep track of everything. Oh, and your bank account #'s -- possibly your PIN #'s just in case I need them, too.

      E-mail address

      Suckers@emailmehere.com

      account:

      1337-1337-1337

    4. Re:If its real... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering how broke TN is......nope

  8. I understand that the EU is voting on software... by kevx45 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    patenting, but what exactly is their to vote about by-laws of what can and can't be patented, etc?

    That's my question.

    Kevin "KevX45" Myrick

    --
    "Now there's a look in your eyes, like black holes in the sky"-Pink Floyd
  9. Now taking bets... by The_Pey · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is seriously a lot of topics to even focus on in one go. My head is spinning just trying to decide on which topic to respond to... When faced with large numbers of topics to read and respond to, people as a large group will invariably choose the same ones and ignore others.

    So, I am now taking bets on which topic will be the unpopular one!

    My bet is the "My nanodots can fit inside your nanodots" story. **YAWN**

    Of course, by submitting this, I have now created a discussion thread on that topic, thereby invalidating my bet. DOH!

    --
    Hmmm...
    1. Re:Now taking bets... by palp · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's only a discussion if someone actually replies to it, and no one has. Er, shit. Nevermind.

      --
      -palp
    2. Re:Now taking bets... by algernon7 · · Score: 0, Redundant
      Don't worry -

      Two people talking is a DIALOGUE.

      It would take a third poster to create a discussion, and that will never happen.
    3. Re:Now taking bets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about as likely as a post from a bitter AC pointing out that the original poster is absolutely right - this is a wealth of topics, in a single plop, floating in a sea of dupes.

      Rediculous [sic]

    4. Re:Now taking bets... by The+J+Kid · · Score: 1
      Don't say that! For the sake of keeping slashdot slashdot, I'll make a good comment about nanodots AND fit in with the rest of slashdot!

      My nanodots can fit inside your nanodots!

      Yeha, cos y0 nanodots are soooo phat I could put like 10 nanodots of mine in it!!!11!!!

      See, that wasn't difficult was it? (Hope it wasn't too painfull though =)
      --
      Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
  10. Open Source Free Energy? by mikeophile · · Score: 4, Funny
    C'mon Tilley. If you're not a fraud, you need to make your invention Open Source.

    The only chance you have is to let the genie out of the bottle and licence your device as GNU/Energy.

    You will become world famous overnight and will still make a fortune in grants, speaking engagements, and probably the Nobel Prize.

    Of course, if your just making stuff up and ripping people off, then I hope they send you to Federal "pound me in the ass" prison.

    1. Re:Open Source Free Energy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GNU/Energy

      What?!? Stallman claims that the energy of the universe depends on his creation?

    2. Re:Open Source Free Energy? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If it works(yeah right) he would be worth trillions. how much do speaking engagments make? How many corporation would try to claim it as there own if it was 'opened'?
      He would get the Nobel prize whether or not he opens it.
      Of course, you can patent perpetual machines, so he would have to keep it very tightly controlled. I imagine iy you had a perpetual machine rnning for years, they might make an exception for it.

      If you invested 500,000 dollars into a company, and they just gave away the device you were investing for, wouldn't you be pissed?

      th only reason he needs to open it is for philosophical ones.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  11. Possibility of being sued ... by SuperDuG · · Score: 5, Funny
    Dear "FileSharingCommunity",

    In light of the fact the RIAA is suing everyone left and right and is now going after more individual users there is a potential that I might get sued. As I don't distribute copyrighted material, I don't know HOW this would be possible, but I'm not about to think the RIAA will do something as simple as "Follow the law". I'm sure there's something I've done wrong that can cause them to force me into a settlement.

    Anyways I expect this to cost somewhere in the ballpark of $130,230.34. That amount was literally randomly typed and it seemed like a real big amount. If I don't get sued, rest assured I will go forth and break the law because there really is no recourse for my actions. Even if I do "break the law" I can still count on the internet community to bail me out.

    The internet is such a great thing and thank you in advance!!

    SuperDuG

    --
    Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
    1. Re:Possibility of being sued ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I know you meant that as a joke, but just in case somebody gets takes it seriously, I quote from here:

      "ABCNews is reporting on a 19-year-old college student at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y. He created a site named ChewPlastic.com where students could search for files on the university network. Mind you, this is not a music file sharing software, this is just a search engine. Presumably, the search engine was being used to search for music files as well. The folks over at the RIAA did not take too kindly to the idea, and sued the student. He settled but denies any wrongdoing. What was settlement, you ask? His life's savings."

      This dude settled cos it was the cheaper option, not cos he was pirating stuff. Its not like he was following in the footsteps of this wh0re.

    2. Re:Possibility of being sued ... by Grax · · Score: 1

      America is a government by the people, for the people, and of the people. Or so they say. So if the people don't have a problem with file-sharing, yet there is some legal problem with it, then that shows a flaw in the system.

      My solution to the whole mess is to avoid purchasing music CDs or having music in my house. This way they cannot sue me because I don't have or distribute any of their stuff. I am worried that if I play a CD too loud and the neighbor records it (due to the analog hole) that I may be liable for sharing music.

      I also do not play movies with the windows open for fear that there may be an unlicensed viewer watching through the window. Let us all do our part to protect "intellectual property" and screw free expression.

    3. Re:Possibility of being sued ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your criminalization was bought and paid for. The US has a long way before the intent of the American Constitution is realized

    4. Re:Possibility of being sued ... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      This depends on what you think the intent was. If you are certain, you might just consider Patrick Henry's opinion*...he was there, after all.

      * "I smell a rat. It squints toward monarchy."

      P.S.: Also consider the reason that the Bill of Rights are the first 10 amendments, rather than included with the original text. (The authors of the original text couldn't get the signatures of the rest of the delagates without making a few changes.)

      P.P.S.: Also consider the authorizations of the original delagates to the first constitutional convention. (They were meeting without authority to plot the overthrow of the Articles of Confederation. Not one state legislature voted authorization ahead of time.)

      And also remember that one of the first bills passed by congress was the "Alien and Sedition" act. Something clearly in violation of the constitution, even as written. But there was no effective check, no appeal. The Supreme Court didn't establish that it had the right to revoke laws for being unconstitutional until around the time of the Civil War (in the Dred Scott decision). (Yes, John Marshall in the first Supreme Court made one decision which asserted that right. In a way that supported what the government wanted. But that wasn't followed up on.)

      I don't like the current Supreme Court. They lost most of their moral authority when they voted (more than once) to corrupt the latest presidential election. But they are a very important balance wheel on the government. Whether they are enough...I'm not at all sure. The recent coup seems to have been accepted with their blessing. And with all of the uncheckable electronic voting machines around we may never again have a free (which is not to claim uncorrupted) election.

      OTOH, this doesn't necessarily mean that the govt will be getting worse. Not necessarily. The forms are still being basically followed, and the elections had already gotten so corrupt, with only those who sold their votes being able to afford to campaign, that this may not make any difference, or could even be a change for the better. My thinking that the current king is a homocidal maniac doesn't mean much. The first king of a dynasty usually is (you could call him the second king, but I'm not sure that his father actually counts).

      Then again, I've heard it said that all of the presidents have been relatives of George Washington. (Aristocrats tend to be an inbred bunch.) I've never checked the assertion. I always assumed that there were several families involved. But they could well be relatives if one went back one generation further.

      Perhaps we will adopt the old Anglo-Saxon model (or have already done so). In that one the king was elected by a council of elders. But the only candidates that could be considered were the relatives of the current king (out to second cousins, I believe). Note that by that model William the Bastard was entitled to be a candidate on Harolds death (or possibly just a bit too distant). The only catch was, he held a sword at the electors throats when he asked for their vote. So, in a twisted sense, it was a legal usurpation.

      And the recent election was, in a less twisted sense, a legal election. The Supreme Court is defined as having the right to make the final decision on what the rules are. It may blatantly violate the facts and common sense, or even the laws of physics, but the rules say that they get to say what the rules are. But they don't have any power to enforce their decisions.

      Another thing to remember is that the main purpose of politics is to get groups of people to work together without killing each other (any more than can be avoided). In that sense, this was a reasonable outcome. Nobody was so angry about it that they started a civil war, and that especially included the major power blocks. If I don't feel that things were done fairly, reasonably, honorably, or decently, well, I'm also not a major power block, and I'm not bloody likely to engage in violence on my own behalf. I didn't even quit my job, or try to emmigrate (though I gave a bit of thought to the latter..and discovered that I'm too old. Nobody want's someone my age as an immigrant.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    5. Re:Possibility of being sued ... by Uriel · · Score: 1

      Interesting...but I don't think that Martin Van Buren, John F Kennedy and George Bush fell out of the same family tree.

    6. Re:Possibility of being sued ... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It was years ago, so possibly the assertion was "every president before Kennedy". And, as I said, I never checked it. (I find it hard to see Nixon as an aristocrat either.)

      To me it's a bit of a side issue. I have always assumed that it was an oligarchy...but I could be wrong.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  12. A perpetual motion car? by Jin+Wicked · · Score: 5, Funny

    What, are you supposed to just grab the door and climb in as it whizzes by, or what? Does it circle the 7-11 for you on autopilot while you're inside getting your Hostess cupcakes and lottery tickets?

    The mind boggles.

    --
    My Webcomic: Asylum on 5th Street
    1. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Osty · · Score: 2, Informative

      What, are you supposed to just grab the door and climb in as it whizzes by, or what? Does it circle the 7-11 for you on autopilot while you're inside getting your Hostess cupcakes and lottery tickets?

      Assuming that this guy isn't a crackpot, what makes you think that the perpetual motion would have anything to do with the movement of the vehicle? I'd guess his perpetual motion engine would be used as any other engine, except this one you wouldn't turn off. In other words, when you need to stop, you'd simply disengage the driveshaft. The perpetual motion machine would continue moving perpetually, you just wouldn't be translating that into rotation of the car's wheels.


      (Yes, I know the parent was supposed to be funny. I thought it was funny, too. Just thought I'd mention that, in case others took him seriously. Like that could happen.)

    2. Re:A perpetual motion car? by kevx45 · · Score: 1

      No, the car swallows you alive and you become the hostess cake, forever stuck in the car of perpetual motion. Well, at least until you starve.

      --
      "Now there's a look in your eyes, like black holes in the sky"-Pink Floyd
    3. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Assuming that this guy isn't a crackpot

      Okay, here's the first thing newly hired patent reviewers of all patent offices in the world are told :

      If it says "perpetual motion" or "endless source of energy" anywhere in the patent application, grab the red stamp labelled "crackpot idea", stamp the patent application, send the application down the "rejected" chute and move to the next one. If you know nothing else, know how to do that.

      Perpetual motion is proven impossible. That's why the feds raided this guy, because asking investment money to fund research on perpetual motion is like screaming "I've got this great scam for you".

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    4. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 0

      Does it circle the 7-11 for you on autopilot while you're inside getting your Hostess cupcakes and lottery tickets?

      Well, in that case, a perpetually running car is possible, provided the 7-11's pump nozzle has a very long hoze and the car's owner has an infinitely deep Amex credit.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    5. Re:A perpetual motion car? by stubear · · Score: 1

      "Perpetual motion is proven impossible."

      Submarines, airplanes and rockets were all thought to be impossible at one time too. Guess someone proved them wrong huh? Never claim something is impossible for it is the surest way to mark yourself as a fool.

    6. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Compuser · · Score: 4, Informative

      As a physicist, let me assure you that perpetual
      motion has not been and never will be _PROVEN_
      impossible. That's not how science works. You
      cannot prove a negative. The most you can say is
      that we have yet to devise an experiment which
      would violate energy conservation law. Scientists
      never prove anything, they only disprove things,
      and concrete things at that (it is easy to show
      that this or that device conserves energy but it
      is impossible to generalize that without some
      sort of qualifiers).

    7. Re:A perpetual motion car? by dnahelix · · Score: 1

      It circles the 7-11, getting faster and faster until it sends the 7-11 back in time (a la Superman) where you can then purchase the winning lottery ticket!

      --
      Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
      They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
      I Hate \.
    8. Re:A perpetual motion car? by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Insightful
      >>"Perpetual motion is proven impossible."
      >Submarines, airplanes and rockets were all thought to be impossible at one time too.

      There is a big difference between "thought to be impossible" and "proven imposible". And the specific cases you mentioned, the "imposisbility" referred to practical engineering rather than theory. Just as I could say that it is impossible to make a battery that runs a car for a week -- it is impossible now, but that implies nothing about future technology.

    9. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Bronster · · Score: 1

      As a physicist, let me assure you that perpetual
      motion has not been and never will be _PROVEN_
      impossible. That's not how science works.


      True, but hey - Albert Einstien is quoted as saying that if he believes the least likely physical "law" to be overturned is the second law of thermodynamics.

      Also, if a perpetual motion machine was possible (producing more energy than was put in to actually create real work rather than just perfecting a zero friction device), then the whole universe would blow up in a puff of positive feedback if you weren't really _really_ careful.

      (ok, so I quit physics after second year Uni because they closed the physics club down and I had nowhere to play cards, so I protested by doing 100% compsci)

    10. Re:A perpetual motion car? by prockcore · · Score: 1

      Perpetual motion is proven impossible.

      Perhaps, but maybe he was mislabelling things? Perhaps he found a way to extract energy from his surroundings?

      I seem to remember someone demonstrating a jet engine that could burn the oxygen in the air without any fuel once it got to a certain speed. The jet would then continue to move without any fuel.

      It's not a perpetual motion device, since it uses air as fuel.. but it could be mistaken for one.

    11. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Lord+Barrabas · · Score: 1
      Quote One: "...perpetual motion has not been and never will be _PROVEN_ impossible. That's not how science works"

      Quote Two: "Scientists never prove anything, they only disprove things,"

      I am the only one that finds these statements contradictory?

    12. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Korgan · · Score: 1

      It is basic physics. It is impossible to get more energy out of a device than you put in to it. Simple example of this would be a turbine for a power plant.

      To spin the turbine, you have to provide it energy. In many cases this comes in the form of Kinetic energy from moving water.

      However, you can never generate so much electricity that the turbine can power itself. Heat, friction and a whole heap of others come in to play and eventually (it could take a long time if you engineer it really well) the turbine will have slowed right down and not be able to produce enough electricy to even spin itself, let alone power anything else.

      I had a link to a site last year that went through a whole heap of "perpetual energy" machines and completely refuted them. However, I cannot find this link and so offer the following one instead.

      http://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.html

      Enjoy

    13. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      That's because they where impossible to engineer at the time.

      But with perpetual motion, there is no question of engineering, but of the basic princilples of the universe as we know it...as far as we know, due to everything we observe, there is a loss of energy due to heatloss, energy which is expressed as sound or energy which is expressed as light, any or all of these lost to the surrounding environment.
      The only way to create a perpetual motion device is to find a way to convert all of the above to kinetic energy.
      But all energy conversion we can and have observed (right down to the quantum level) suffer energy loss due to differently expresses kinds of energy occuring when the energy of a system is converted.

      So it could happen (a perpetual motion device) but it runs contrary to all we have observed of the universe, and if you could make one, we'd have to rethink /all/ we know of science.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    14. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      's a (sc)ramjet you're talking about. An Aussy demonstrated one (after NASA couldn't get it's 1e3x more expensive one to work).

      But that's not perpetual motion, and would never be mistaken as such. See, the thing is we're not midlle ages alchemists, and we know that
      a) it takes a whole lot of energy for a ramjet to be built and also taken to the hight it needs to perform (ie the oxygen needs to be sufficiently rare to self combust due to the pressure-increase the shape of the 'jet' intake causes by compressing it) and
      b)the thing'll not stay up indeffinitely due to the fact that the air friction will disintegrate it in the end.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    15. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Ed_Moyse · · Score: 1
      They're not contradictory. He's saying that science can't prove a theory in both sentences. For example Quantum Electro Dynamics is tested to an almost unimaginable level of accuracy, but tomorrow morning someone could discover something which QED cannot explain.


      All science can do is to quantify how much we trust a theory.


      *

    16. Re:A perpetual motion car? by nathanh · · Score: 4, Informative
      Perpetual motion is proven impossible.

      Wrong. A perpetual motion machine is impossible only if the laws of thermodynamics are correct. Unfortunately the laws of thermodynamics are based on human observation and humans make mistakes.

      Of course, there's plenty of supporting evidence for the current laws. So it's not very likely that they're wrong and subsequently it's not very likely that perpetual motion machines exist, but a good scientist never says never.

      A more correct statement would have been "a perpetual motion machine would destroy the laws of thermodynamics, cast doubt on thousands of experiments, and undermine physics as we know it, though that doesn't mean it's impossible".

      PS: I took tertiary level thermodynamics courses.

    17. Re:A perpetual motion car? by stubear · · Score: 1

      "we'd have to rethink /all/ we know of science."

      Scientists wonce thought the world was flat and that the universe revolved around the earth. I'm not asying a perpetual motion device is possible given our current understanding of the universe and level of technology but to casually dismiss something and claim it is impossible simply because you want to agree with the status quo is not a wise thing to do. Someone like Kepler will come along and force you to rethink your entire world.

    18. Re:A perpetual motion car? by stubear · · Score: 1

      I meant opernicus not Kepler. What the hell was I thinking?

    19. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Scientists wonce thought the world was flat and that the universe revolved around the earth."

      Uh...people thought that, but they weren't scientists.

    20. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Theaetetus · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      First, the guy is a crackpot, so don't think I'm defending his snake oil claims...

      However, playing Devil's Advocate, you could theoretically' make a power supply that tapped into the Earth's magnetic field to get your power, creating electricity at the expense of slowing down the spin of the Earth a little bit at a time. There's definitely an energy source there, but it wouldn't be a super-obvious one.

      -T

    21. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right, those statements are contradictory. The second one is especially troublesome if you re-phrase it thus: "Scientists never prove anything, they only prove that some things are false." This position, known as falsificationism, was first articulated by Karl Popper.

      Before any Europeans had been to Australia, they assumed that all swans are white. Inductive reasoning suggested that since only white swans had been observed, all swans must be white. However, it was later discovered that in Australia some swans are black. Thus, it seems that the assumption that all swans are white has been proven false.

      However, there are a number of assumptions involved here. In order for one to disprove the claim that all swans are white, he or she must first prove at least two things:

      1. The "black swan" is in fact a swan and not a weird duck or something.
      2. The "black swan" is in fact black and not just covered with coal, etc.

      Clearly, in order to prove that one theory is false, you need to rely on other assumptions which could themselves be questioned. It simply isn't the case that scientists "only disprove things."

      However, even if it is impossible to prove something either true or false, there is something to be said for falsificationism. When scientists say they have proven something false, they usually mean that they have shown it to be inconsistent with other well established principles.

      In fact, you'll be hard pressed to find a single philosopher of science who thinks that scientists are able to conclusively prove anything "true" or "false." However, I think it's safe to say that science offers powerful methods for making sense of the world, and falsificationism is a important part of this.

    22. Re:A perpetual motion car? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It's a common english idiom, but it certainly is wrong, when taken literally.

      What should, instead, have been said is:
      1) Statements invoking the universal quantifier (all) in the positive sense cannot be proven correct, but only logically consistent with the remainder of the things believed true.

      2) Statements invoking the existential quantifier (some) in the positive sense can be tested.

      3)... 4)...
      (three and four are about the respective quantifiers in the negative sense).

      You can probably guess why he didn't phrase it that way.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    23. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      Scientists never thought the world was flat. The Greeks knew it was spherical back at the dawn of science, and that fact has never been forgotten - not even in the so-called Dark Ages. The mistake people actually made was thinking that it was impossible to travel to the southern hemisphere on account of the great heat at the equator.

    24. Re:A perpetual motion car? by aminorex · · Score: 1

      > Perpetual motion is proven impossible.

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means
      what you think it means.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    25. Re:A perpetual motion car? by jafuser · · Score: 1

      I always wonder about these "free energy" machines in so much as I wonder if maybe someday someone might invent something which pulls energy directly off the rotation of the earth or something similar.

      Locally, it would appear that such a device would be generating energy from nowhere, but in fact it's pulling it from a resource we don't readily see.

      What if someone finds a way to extract energy from sources which we don't immediately see, but he is immediately tossed in the loony bin with padded walls before we give them a chance?

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    26. Re:A perpetual motion car? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, the second law of thermodynamics was established while the phlogistin mechanism (sp?) was still the prevailing theory of energy transfer.

      This doesn't make it wrong, but demonstrates it's based on observation.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    27. Re:A perpetual motion car? by Korgan · · Score: 1

      But you just admitted that the energy supply would deplete by "slowing down the spin of the Earth a little bit at a time".

      Therefore, even that wouldn't be perpetual energy or perpetual motion and still follows the laws of thermodynamics.

      Thing is, for over 150 years people have been trying to disprove the laws of thermodynamics. Quite simply put, it is impossible to create more energy than you use. Whether it be heat, kinetic, electricty or "other".

      However, I could stand to lose a few pounds... slowing the Earth a bit sounds like a good way to do that... Purely in the interests of science that is. ;-)

  13. Arg... by Duncan3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "150,000 signatures" ... "2000 company owners"

    But how much did you PAY the politicians to vote the way you want them to. Yea... I thought so...

    Geeks just don't get it.

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    1. Re:Arg... by FattMattP · · Score: 1
      2000 company owners

      But how much did you PAY the politicians to vote the way you want them to.

      How big are those 2000 companies? You'd be surprised how much pull a company that pays a lot of money in taxes has.
      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    2. Re:Arg... by sn00ker · · Score: 1
      But how much did you PAY the politicians to vote the way you want them to. Yea... I thought so...
      It's Europe, not the US. Politicians there don't tend to have constituencies composed of enormous companies.

      --
      "God, root, what is difference?" - Pitr, userfriendly
    3. Re:Arg... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nitpicky, but in your sig the quote should be "God, root, what is difference?" See the Nov 11, 1998 UserFriendly. =)

    4. Re:Arg... by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      "It's Europe, not the US. Politicians there don't tend to have constituencies composed of enormous companies."

      Hmmm.

      Volkwagen AG (partially owned by the state gov't of Westfalia)

      Airbus - more direct gov't subsidies than you can shake a stick at.

      Peugot (It's against French law (patent?) for any car other than a Peugot to have a Zero in the middle of a 3 digit model # - that's why it's the Porsche 911 instead of the 901)

      That's just 3 off the top of my head, all of whom are protected by their politicians.

      Oh, sorry, I forgot: the US is Evil, Europe is Noble, Africa and South America are Victims... (repeat in a sing-song voice until you believe it!)

      Blech

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    5. Re:Arg... by dago · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Er, you somehow messed up :

      EU : citizen elect politicians. Depending on that choice : politicians (usually left) favors national companies, ev. buy some shares, ... or, if opposite position, privatize, liberalize, and so on. state give (tax) money to parties and politician for campaings/...

      US : citizen elects politicians. companies give money to politicians. then, honestly, what will they favor ?

      Add to that the factor that you'll need (proportionaly) much more money to get elected in US ...

      Btw, to correct a few details
      - Airbus : As if boeing wasn't paying contributions to US politicians which accidently rose army's budgets ???
      - VW had to pay a few hundred billions euro fines a few years ago due to some fraud charge with the EU
      - Peugeot : it's a trademark law, not a patent. and it's based on international agreements. and this law (as the patent laws) do not favor specifically some companies over others.

      And btw, if you really want to dig up that and makes your final statement worth it, look at how things are going in Switzerland vs western europe for those points.

      --
      #include "coucou.h"
    6. Re:Arg... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Having seen our representitevs tell big campaign distributors to 'shove off' on some issue, I have confidence that our representitives don't always follow the money. If that was true, do you thinkk NAY state would have smoking laws? seatbelt laws?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  14. Yeah freakin right by Trelane,+the+Squire · · Score: 1

    If it were a perpetual motion machine or the like, the government would declare it top secret and/or a threat to national security, or barring that, would try to make it and the inventor out to be a crackpot like they did with Tesla... The uspto is just the gov's way of sifting out all the really usefull items from public knowledge and so they can maintain control. (sorry.. rant over. touched a nerve there... I have special nerve endings just for when stories of inventions like this come up)

    1. Re:Yeah freakin right by YOU+LIKEWISE+FAIL+IT · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I could be very wrong, but I don't seem to recall Tesla being blacklisted or abused by the US Government. Taken advantage of by those he worked for? Yes. Stabbed in the back and then ignored by Edison? Yes. Victim of a massive government coverup? I wouldn't say so.

      As to the bit about him being made out as a 'crackpot', I'm not sure if that worked very well - Tesla is well known for his research and innovations to this day ( like, the, er, practical alternating current motor he designed in ~1888 ) - and a general education in physics or electronics will bring you into contact with the man and his ideas ( at least in my experience ).

      IMHO, the real crackpots are the ones who keep claiming they have discovered the 'lost weird science of Tesla' and 'Teslas unfinished overunity generator', usually right up the back of the 'new age' magazine along with the guy selling crystals from atlantis. Bleah.

      --
      One god, one market, one truth, one consumer.
    2. Re:Yeah freakin right by vlad30 · · Score: 1

      However the point is if this guy publicly showed his product and invention even if it was copied he would still have a case in patents if he applied already and it is proven to work (note IANAL) he could then sue all those who copied the idea and recover losses/profits which appears to be the method many patent holders use these days

      Alternatively If it really worked how many Slashdotters would do the Good Thing and donate it to humanity and save the planet ?

      --
      Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
    3. Re:Yeah freakin right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think if there were real good guys to vote for; that would be the likely conclusion. Statisticly, it's an impossibility or at least camel through an eye of a needle probability.

    4. Re:Yeah freakin right by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      That's the plot of the Heinlein story 'Let There Be Light'. These inventors discover a cystal substance that converts light to electricity with a 99% or so conversion factor. (They're trying to invent 'cold light', a lightbulb without wasted energy in the form of heat, and they discover their lights work backwards.)

      They get some energy people leaning on them, and they run to the newspaper with an exclusive...and with the requirement that anyone who wants an interview must publish the full plans, plans any idiot can impliment in a somewhat equipped lab, which they then go and patent. (Yes, you can patent stuff up to a year after you invent it.)

      All this 'government coverup' stuff is nonsense...in these days, you don't even have to force a newspaper to publish it...we have Usenet, you just dump the plans on that, then patent it after everyone's learned of your amazing discovery and it's too late to supress it.

      Sure, by having simple-to-use plans out in the open like that, you're inviting a few patent infringers...but does that really matter when you'd have power companies paying you trillions of dollars to impliment your technology? I mean, honest to God, if you had legal control of a magical energy-making machine, you would have more power than anyone in the world, no pun intended.

      Of course, the obvious explaination occurs when you check the compound's wiring. Guess what? He's still on the grid! Isn't that silly of him.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  15. Pay close attention to the names by poptones · · Score: 5, Interesting

    On that EU petition. IBM is one of the most patent-laden companies in the US, yet some of their officers are signing onto a petition to prevent such a rush in the EU. What does this tell you about the US patent process? Patents and lawsuits are the price of doing business in the US. Meanwhile countries with more SANE "IP laws" are going to command more and more of the market share in an increasingly competetive world market.

    1. Re:Pay close attention to the names by cpeterso · · Score: 1


      Maybe IBM (a US company) does not want European competitors to be able to patent new software ideas. When those European companies try to compete in the US, they will have to play by the US rules.. and face IBM's buttload of patents.

    2. Re:Pay close attention to the names by poptones · · Score: 1
      That makes no sense. If IBM holds a software patent in the US and a european company uses that technology then, without the ability to enforce that patent in euroupe, they have no legal recourse to challenge them. IOW their "patent" becomes useless.

      You argument on their motive has no logical merit.

    3. Re:Pay close attention to the names by RodgerDodger · · Score: 1
      IBM have lots of patents because they've got good engineers who come up with a lot of ideas.

      However, IBM management have looked at the situation and basically come up with the following:

      If I've got good engineers who understand my technology really well, they could probably understand other technology really well also. Therefore, I gain if technology isn't patented; sure, people can try to steal my technology, but I can try to steal theirs, and I'm better at it.

      However, if I can't steal their technology, I'd better make sure they can't steal mine.


      This makes it easy to understand why one of the most patent-laden companies in the world wants to limit patents. :) More power to them, I say.

      (Oh, and the countries that ignore IP laws, like China, will command more and more of the market share; it costs a lot of money to come up with something new, but relatively little to rip it off. Spend your "R&D" budget on industrial espionage instead)
      --
      "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
    4. Re:Pay close attention to the names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a big difference between the windows operating system and the patented one click purchasing.

    5. Re:Pay close attention to the names by jdhutchins · · Score: 1

      IBM does have a lot of patents. However, I doubt (I may be wrong, though) that many of them are "dumb" patents. By "dumb" patents, I mean things like one-click shopping, etc... I'm willing to be that IBM's patents are for real innovation, not thinking of something that's already implemented and patenting it.
      The laws in Europe are laws that will allow more of these dumb patents, and IBM wants to prevent that. IBM will still continue to get their patents on real innovation.

    6. Re:Pay close attention to the names by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

      That makes no sense. If IBM holds a software patent in the US and a european company uses that technology then, without the ability to enforce that patent in euroupe, they have no legal recourse to challenge them. IOW their "patent" becomes useless.

      Yes, but if the european company would like to sell their products in the US, the US patents would apply, no matter where the company is based.

      --

      Enigma

    7. Re:Pay close attention to the names by Nurf · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if the european company would like to sell their products in the US, the US patents would apply, no matter where the company is based.

      Maybe, but they may apply in funny ways. I know of one company that got hit with a spurious USA patent, and they somehow came out okay because they arranged to make the stuff outside the USA and import it.

      So from this I guess the patent may stop you from making that thing in the USA, but not necessarily from selling it. I'm not exactly sure what the loopholes are.

      I'm not sure about this at all, but thought it was an interesting point for conversation.

      -Nurf

      --
      ---
    8. Re:Pay close attention to the names by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 1

      Officially, though, IBM is in favour of this. It's a major influence in the BSA, which drafted the proposal now presented by the European Commission. (An early draft was distributed by the Commission as a Word document, and the author name embedded in the file was that of a BSA employee.)

    9. Re:Pay close attention to the names by Everybody · · Score: 1
      Maybe IBM (a US company) does not want European competitors to be able to patent new software ideas. When those European companies try to compete in the US, they will have to play by the US rules.. and face IBM's buttload of patents.

      This is an interesting idea. But:
      • European companies can apply for software patents in the US, so they could compete there, if software patents would be any help.
      • IBM has been granted software patents in Europe already - to enforce them would probably be possible. Still, defendants could hope to have a chance in court on the merit that software is not supposed to be patentable in the EU (explicitly stated in EP Art. 52), but this last straw will vanish when the EU parlament decides to 'legalize' these illegaly granted software patents retroactively.
      • Having some patents will not help you to compete against IBM, since you are guaranteed to infringe of hundreds of their patents. Did you know that in 1995, in Europe IBM has applied for - and been granted - a patent for a a method for fullfilling requests of a web browser which effectively describes a dynamically expansible webserver? This is just one of thousands they have

      So when IBM employees are signing the petition, I believe that they are honestly seeing that software patents are a threat for the whole software industry.

      BTW, I also believe that if Europe will manage to oppose software patents, it will be easier to fight against them in the US.
    10. Re:Pay close attention to the names by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Probably depends on just what the patent covers. If it covered a manufacturing process, it would have just the effect you describe.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  16. http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by SuperDuG · · Score: 5, Funny
    I've got a better idea. Is there any way that maybe we could just send a letter to every "bulk emailer" and ask them to please stop. I don't think anyone has ever just asked them to stop and maybe we should. Perhaps we can offer them dinner and show to go with it, as they're just misunderstood.

    You want a "Plan for Spam" or a "End to all ends"??? Here ya go. You take all these lowlife scum bandwidth hogging email clogging horrible pieces of rat shit they are. Take them into the streets and beat them until they are a soupy mess on the floor that can only be cleaned up with a hose.

    AND TELEVISE IT, that way anyone else thinking about joining the industry can see the example of "what will happen to you" and find another way to make their dirty money. I say we throw telemarketers ans sex criminals in the same boat, all of them. Put um all together and just beat them with a small stick.

    That's my plan for spam. If we can bomb the hell out of a country for no reason then goddammit america can beat spammers to a pulp as well.

    So yeah, that's my plan.

    --
    Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
    1. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've been listening to a little too much George Carlin, haven't you?

    2. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by unix+guy · · Score: 1

      And can I hear an "Amen"?!?!

      I have approximately 30 people who mail me everyday who seem to be EXTREMELY concerned about the size of my penis - can we do them first? - Please?

      --
      "Straddling the sword of technology..."
    3. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw, man; you totally had me until you mentioned the sex-criminal-thing.
      A lot of people live in the south, where due to bible-belt laws, most of the things I've ever done sexually would be a crime. (Bill Clinton's cigar-and-oral thing is what I'm talking about here, you sick bastards, not the gerbils and electrical tape, or anything remotely like it!)

      The spammers, tho.... beaten to a pulp, fed to wolves, and shit off a cliff; That would be priceless!

    4. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by SuperDuG · · Score: 1

      Well I was going to say pedophiles, but I couldn't remember how to spell it (still don't know if I spelled it right). But I'm not talking about the guys who like to have their hair ripped out while gettin some. I'm talkin about the REAL sex criminals, the ones who take the innocence of children away ... you know ... like priests ...

      --
      Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
    5. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by Grax · · Score: 2, Funny

      The message said "This little pill will make your penis 3 inches longer". So I ordered 4 pills.

    6. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by SuperDuG · · Score: 1
      Everyone needs heros. What can I say ... mine's foul mouthed synical truthsayers ...

      Forgot Dennis Leary and Dennis Miller ...

      Sorta draw from their influences and dig down deep into my soul and find the wonderfulness which is ... telling people exactly what they're thinking, but are too afraid to admit.

      --
      Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
    7. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by commodoresloat · · Score: 1
      gerbils and electrical tape

      The tape is for terrorist attacks?

    8. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by Jardine · · Score: 1

      I understand what the gerbil is for (everyone has probably heard that urban legend) but what's the electrical tape for? Would duct tape also be acceptable?

    9. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Stops the gerbil from splitting.

      Didn't really want to know after all, eh?

    10. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you been listening to the news lately. A Texas law against gay sex was being appealed to the Supreme Court. It just got overturned. And every law like it, whether gay sex only, or even covering all people, gay or straight.

      The Supreme Court has finally decided the government should stay out of our bedrooms, as long as it is freely consensual acts between two adults. So go have some great kinky sex tonight, ok.

      The funny thing is that blowjobs are now legal in Utah, but a person still can't charge for them.

    11. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by Mark+Ferguson · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, this is not about stopping spam. This is about keeping email a usable tool of communication. Steve Linford (spamhaus), SPEWS, MAPS, etc... are about stopping spam. We are not even going to try to compete with these folks because we feel they are doing a service to the online community.

      What is left with all the various black list are folks that can no longer use their email through no fault of their own except making an uninformed decision as to who their provider is.

      The way this works is the owner of each individual mail server must apply to be white listed. This will mean the ISP can get white listed and if a customer spam through their listing they must deal with it quickly or their IP is delisted. If they fail to do anything, their IP could be placed on the black list temporarily to prevent the spam run.

      This also means if a colo'ed customer is sending spam they will be delisted and possibly black listed without affecting the user base of the ISP itself. The ISP will of course be expected to act quickly to educate and/or terminate this customer.

      We feel this is the best approach to keeping email a usable tool for communication.

    12. Re:http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/ by drteknikal · · Score: 1

      But we can only do that to spammers outside the US for now. Obviously, Ashcroft still has more work to do before we can apply Taliban tactics domestically without a veil of secrecy.

      --
      http://drteknikal.blogspot.com/
  17. Where's the link? by TCM · · Score: 1

    So, where do I click to order transparent Europatents with USB connection?

    --
    Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
  18. Yikes by Faust7 · · Score: 1

    the perpetual motion DeLorean

    Sounds like you could end up inadvertently careening way, way, farther back or forward in time than you ever wanted to go...

    1. Re:Yikes by Oaktree_b · · Score: 1

      So I can go back in time and make sure my Dad punches out Biff and marries my mom to make sure that I don't cease to exist? That still confuses me you know...

      --
      ------ Will of Iron, Knees of Jello.
    2. Re:Yikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Three words: suspension of disbelief

      A concept that many geeks are apparently not familiar with.

  19. You *have* to have a compound... by fm6 · · Score: 1, Funny

    If you don't have a "compound, you're not a "cult leader". And if you're not a "cult leader", you're not allocated any "devoted followers". And if you don't have any "devoted followers" how are you supposed to get a date?

    1. Re:You *have* to have a compound... by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 4, Funny

      Go to a bar, you lazyass! Sheesh, no wonder you never get dates. All you do all day is sit around in your compound, plotting world domination.

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    2. Re:You *have* to have a compound... by fm6 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Women in bars laugh at me. Women in my compound who've been brainwashed by my evil plans are much friendlier.

  20. USB Mess by redune45 · · Score: 2, Informative

    It looks like we've gotten all worried over pretty well nothing.
    I admit I was upset to hear the news about the Pseudo USB 2.0, but looking at the logos that manufacturers are supposed to use, it looks like everything should make perfect sense.
    Glad to see its been all straightened out.

    --
    redune.com: The World 3.2 Megapixels at a time
    1. Re:USB Mess by angle_slam · · Score: 1

      The USB article never should have been printed. The article was based on a source of dubious accuracy, not seconded by any respectable source and was refuted by many in the comments. Yet /.ers still thought it was true.

    2. Re:USB Mess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you must understand that slashdot just has to be pissed about at least one thing at all times. They are always looking for new things to be pissed at, but it turns out that they just don't think through a lot of their complaints.

    3. Re:USB Mess by Detritus · · Score: 1

      I recently bought a printer. The box says "USB 2.0 Full Speed". That had me fooled until I read the article on slashdot. Looking more closely at the box, it has the basic USB logo (not high speed).

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    4. Re:USB Mess by angle_slam · · Score: 1
      I recently bought a printer. The box says "USB 2.0 Full Speed".

      What printer was it? It would be interesting to see what the web site says.

      That said, the big concern with misuse of the phrase USB 2.0 isn't printers. They can't communicate at Hi Speed anyway. The big concern is with the controller. If you think you have a Hi Speed port on your computer and then you buy a Hi Speed hard drive, you would be incredibly disappointed. Realistically, storage (hard drive, burners, flash card readers) is the only product type that needs Hi Speed. Printers, scanners, keyboards, etc., only need full-speed or less.

    5. Re:USB Mess by Detritus · · Score: 1
      It was a Canon i320.

      USB 2.0 High Speed might be useful for printers that rely on the host's printer driver for much of their functionality. The printer driver may be sending huge bitmaps to the printer.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  21. The Tilley story by vinsci · · Score: 4, Informative
    Look here for everything you ever wanted to know about Carl B. Tilley and his "invention", including video footage and the inside whistleblower story.

    For the rest of the site, uh, well, no comments. ;-)

    --

    Trusted Computing FAQ | Free Dawit Isaak!
  22. SCO Management reads /.?? by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    And we thought lawyers couldn't read....

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  23. Dupe! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, a dupe in the comments for the original story -- that's the fastest yet!

  24. Soundex? Holy crap! by peacefinder · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After trying the Soundex tool, I am just bewildered how anyone could think this algorithim is appropriate for a no-fly list. Example:

    Name: Hughes
    Soundex code: H220
    Matches: haessig hages haggis haghighi hagos hajek hakes hasak hasas haschke hasegawa hasek hassick hassig haukaas hawkes haycock haycook heacock heacox hecox heikes heschke hescock heziak hickock hickok hickox higashi highshaw higuchi hikes hiscock hiscox hojczyk hojeij hokes hoosock hosack hosaka hoschek hoseck hosek hosick hossack hougas hoysock huges hugghis hughes hughs hugus husak husayko hykes housekeeper

    Hawkes? Housekeeper? Hickox?

    No wonder there's so many complaints!

    --
    With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
    1. Re:Soundex? Holy crap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't just flagging everyone with a variant of "Mohamed" anywhere in their name be a lot more effective?

    2. Re:Soundex? Holy crap! by Moses+Lawn · · Score: 1

      Now I thought Soundex was supposed to be a way to find similar sounding words with different spellings. This seems to come up with the set of all words that start with the same letter and have more or less the same consonant-vowel ordering.

      I agree - this is a ridiculous idea. I can only imagine someone at the FAA or "Homeland Security" office having the brainstorm of "Hey - here's a way to find a bunch of similar names" and the clueless management (who desperately need to be seen to do *something*, no matter how unworkable) jumping on it. To the technically illiterate, it sounds great.

      Unfortunately, this isn't going to stop anyone who wants to make up a pseudonym, as long as he isn't stupid or lazy amd makes up one that just starts with the same letters and sounds like his. Besides, that misses the point. You need photo ID to get near a plane in this country, right? A passport or driver's license, something official. So, either people are travelling under their real names, in which case we don't need a scheme at all, or they're professionals and have fake documents, in which case they could have any damn names in the world (with the strong chance that they won't be "Mohhammed al-Hussein Ibrahim" or anything else that will set a detector off).

      If you're trying to spot people on a list and they're coming from someplace with laxer security, wouldn't it be a lot easier, not to mention more effective, to hand out a human-generated list of common alternate spellings and having passport control look at that, instead of trying to generate 25 barely-related names for each person you're looking for?

      Sigh. I'm so ashamed of my government. For so many reasons.

      --

      What if life is just a side effect of some other process and God has no idea we exist?

    3. Re:Soundex? Holy crap! by prockcore · · Score: 1

      I feel safe knowing that homeland security uses cutting edge technologies like Soundex* to protect its citizens. Truly this dept has brought the best and brightest together to help in this our time of need.

      *Soundex - Screwing up the U.S. census since 1890.

    4. Re:Soundex? Holy crap! by Sentry21 · · Score: 1

      After trying the Soundex tool, I am just bewildered how anyone could think this algorithim is appropriate for a no-fly list.

      Here's mine:
      Name: Udey
      Soundex: U300
      Matches: Udo Udoh Udy Ueda Uhde Uthe Utt Uyeda Utvik

      I don't understand why it flags the name 'Utvik', which sounds (to me) to be somewhat Scandinavian, but seems to ignore 'Uday', a name spelt and pronounced almost exactly the same, which also happens to be the same name as the first son of Sadadm Hussein. I guess that's good, right?

      Fortunately for me, my name is very common in India, which should help keep it off the list (or give me an excuse to not get held up). Then again, I'm as caucasian as they come, so it might seem suspicious.

      --Dan

    5. Re:Soundex? Holy crap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah But Uday and Udey have the same Soundex Value of U300. The list just shows who in the Census has a matching value.

    6. Re:Soundex? Holy crap! by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Wow, can I be a government contractor too?

      Soundex was long ago abandoned in favor of metaphone, then double metaphone as appropriate algorithms for these kinds of searches.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  25. Send just $1.00 to Peng by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If many of us just sent $1.00 to Peng's fund we could make a big difference and help fight the RIAA instead of just complaining about them.

    I just sent a dollar. I realize it isn't much but I am unemployed.

    Donate a dollar right here.

    Thanks,
    Loomis

    1. Re:Send just $1.00 to Peng by commodoresloat · · Score: 1
      Donate a dollar right here.

      Can you please provide a link to where we can download a dollar too?

  26. Re:article incase you missed it. by visualight · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Now thats funny.

    --
    Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
  27. Donate a dollar to Peng by loomis · · Score: 2, Informative

    (Accidently posted this AC the first time sorry)

    If many of us just sent $1.00 to Peng's fund we could make a big difference and help fight the RIAA instead of just complaining about them.

    I just sent a dollar. I realize it isn't much but I am unemployed.

    Donate a dollar right here.

    Thanks,
    Loomis

    --
    "The television is the retina of the mind's eye" - Videodrome
    1. Re:Donate a dollar to Peng by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the hell is donating money to someone who took the easy way out fighting the RIAA? If he actually went to court against the RIAA instead of settling out of court, I'd be glad to give him money. THAT is fighting the RIAA. He didn't and neither did any of the other students. Now they're just panhandling and counting on the naive people on the internet to bail them out.

    2. Re:Donate a dollar to Peng by pyr0 · · Score: 1

      Not so. Think about it this way...the RIAA has virtually unliminited funds. Peng has virtually zero funds in comparison. Even if he *did* win, do you know how much money it would take to cover the legal fees? I don't want to even think about it! So what is giving the kid 5 bucks going to hurt? Hell, I just blew 40 tonight playing darts, playing pool, and drinking some beer...basically mindless fun. I consider the 5 bucks I donated to the kid to be the best money I've spent all day.

  28. More Tilley Info by DrLudicrous · · Score: 1
    Check out this site for yet more info on the Tilley Foundation:

    http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Tilley/fraud/rai d/index.html

    There is some sort of forum there, and people are going crazy about how Tilley's rights were violated when the government seized his stuff. Personally, I don't see that as seizure of property as much as it is seizure of evidence- the guy supposedly had cash lying around everywhere in common objects like coffee cans. Besides, how is the government supposed to test his devices if it doesn't have them?

    1. Re:More Tilley Info by DrLudicrous · · Score: 1
      BTW, what is up with the formatting on Slashdot? The comment form REFUSED to accept the URL correctly, it kept putting a space in the word 'raid'. That sucks a lot, and there is no reason for it work like that. How can anyone post a URL?

      http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Tilley/fraud/rai d/index.html

    2. Re:More Tilley Info by norweigiantroll · · Score: 1
    3. Re:More Tilley Info by sebi · · Score: 2, Informative

      BTW, what is up with the formatting on Slashdot? The comment form REFUSED to accept the URL correctly, it kept putting a space in the word 'raid'. That sucks a lot, and there is no reason for it work like that. How can anyone post a URL?

      Slashcode automatically inserts a space after a certain number of characters. This is to keep long URLs (and trolls) from messing up the layout. You get used to it and remove the space after copying the address. If you want to make things convenient for others you could just use standard HTML linking:

      <a href="insert URL here">Descriptive Text</a >

      This way you get Those fancy links.

    4. Re:More Tilley Info by DrLudicrous · · Score: 1

      Thanks sebi and AC. Very helpful. Tilley 101

  29. Re:article incase you missed it. by gazuga · · Score: 1

    I don't know what's funnier though - the actual post, or the fact that (at the moment at least), 30% of the mods have modded as "Informative".

    --
    "I turn away with fright and horror from the lamentable evil of functions which do not have derivatives."
  30. Soundex by peachpuff · · Score: 1
    "I thought if Soundex can be used for something as important as "no-fly" lists then certainly we should be able to get some entertainment value out of it!"
    Good thing that site lists some of the other names with the same code. It's nice to know that "Scott" matches "Shaheed" on the airline computers.
    --
    -- . . ramblin' . . .
  31. Compounds and trade secrets by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

    OK I think I figured out his trade secret enough radioactive material cramed inside a simple coil generator works nearly forever well longer then your life expantancy sitting that near to a hot pile :) And when will people learn call it a compound and every F?? out there is looking at you. Now granted not letting investors look inside the black box is one thing but from the sounds of it his partners didnt get to see either.

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
  32. cowboneal soundex by Gabrill · · Score: 2, Funny

    only returns 4 surnames.[p] cabinilla cabanillas chiappinelli cauffman [p] supercalafragilisticexpyalladocious returns 116

    --
    Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
  33. Electric Vechicles are Scary by Bocaj · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At least to a US economy. It won't shock me if it turns out to be a hoax, but it probably scares some people that it might not be. This could be the basis for a push to the "raid the compound" stage instead of less aggressive measures. If the invention is not snake oil, the crude oil industry would like to know before it's released. I'm not screaming conspiracy, but it's realistic that people in oil would nudge investors and the govt. in this direction. "Hey, don't you want to know what he's doing with all that money?"

    Just suppose for a moment that he stumbled on easy cold fusion, and then actually started to produce a product. Then release the details the day before the product ships. There is no time for FUD, and the economy could go into a tail spin. People doubting the value of cars, oil, etc. I'm all for free energy, but don't start a fire under a snow covered tree.

    1. Re:Electric Vechicles are Scary by IronChef · · Score: 1

      If the invention is not snake oil...

      An electric car that doesn't need to be recharged... if it ISN'T snake oil, I will eat my dinosaur burner.

      Then I will drive my new Tilley DeLorean to the Fry's by the spaceport, to pick up a new replicator for my kitchen.

  34. Not only that... by Cryptnotic · · Score: 4, Funny
    ...the implications of it being an actual working device are astronomical.

    ...the odds of it working are infinitessimal.

    --
    My other first post is car post.
    1. Re:Not only that... by d99-sbr · · Score: 1

      Or more formally you could say that you can always get arbitrarily astronomical implications for sufficiently infinitesimal odds of functionality.

  35. Soundex and drivers license numbers by jms · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well that was interesting. I just did the soundex test, and the soundex code S450 sure looked familiar. That's because it's the first four characters of my Illinois drivers license number. Aha! I had been wondering about that part of the code for years.

    I now know that the coding (for males) is:

    aaaa-bbbc-cddd

    aaaa = soundex of last name
    bbb = ?
    cc = year of birth
    ddd = (month of birth - 1) * 31 + day of birth

    I seem to recall that ddd is altered for females.

    Anyone have a decoding for bbb? I'm guessing that it's just a serial number to ensure unique IDs.

    1. Re:Soundex and drivers license numbers by eightball · · Score: 3, Informative
      Try here

      I couldn't get it to match my state license, but you might have better luck...

    2. Re:Soundex and drivers license numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seem to recall that ddd is altered for females.

      Of course! No woman is naturally that large.

    3. Re:Soundex and drivers license numbers by Lish · · Score: 1

      Wow, I would never have noticed that.

      I just moved to Minnesota, and my new DL# starts with my Soundex code too. The rest seems random though, no relation to my birthday or SSN anything, at least not obviously.

      --
      "This message is composed of 100% recycled electrons."
    4. Re:Soundex and drivers license numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. What's your bbb? Mine is 555.

    5. Re:Soundex and drivers license numbers by WhaDaYaKnow · · Score: 1

      Salem? Slim? Sloan? Do I get a cooky? ;-)

    6. Re:Soundex and drivers license numbers by caffeinated_bunsen · · Score: 1

      Michigan seems to do the same thing. It was obvious enough that the first character of the license number was the first letter of the holder's name, but I'd never thought there was any relationship to the first 3 numbers. Does anybody know the algorithm to generate the rest of a Michigan driver's license number? I've always been kinda curious about that.

      --

      Bugrit! Millenium hand and shrimp!
    7. Re:Soundex and drivers license numbers by Crash+Gordon · · Score: 2, Informative

      bbb = ?

      I don't remember it exactly (got it written down around here someplace...) but this is created from the first and middle names.

      ddd = (month of birth - 1) * 31 + day of birth

      I seem to recall that ddd is altered for females.


      Add 600 if female.

      Here's a GWBASIC tool I wrote that calculates Illinois Driver's license numbers. Be kind; remember it's GWBASIC and note the date :-)

      There is no serialization in the number. Everything is calcualted from the name, gender, and birthdate of the individual. If I ever have twins, I plan to choose names that work out to the same driver's license number, just to see what happens (evil grin).

    8. Re:Soundex and drivers license numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm.... Florida's starts the same way... Mine's C632

      Conspiracy?

  36. Fun with Soundex by barista · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hmmm. According to the Soundex, I'm a haggis.

    Does that mean I'm not fit to fly?

    1. Re:Fun with Soundex by sn00ker · · Score: 4, Funny
      Hmmm. According to the Soundex, I'm a haggis.

      Does that mean I'm not fit to fly?

      Dunno, but if you're not eaten or refrigerated I'm sure you'd be fit for the flies.

      --
      "God, root, what is difference?" - Pitr, userfriendly
  37. So long as it remains closed by SHEENmaster · · Score: 1

    fluffy will still be alive. Hypothetically at least.

    Ironic that so long as the cat isn't with us, it is still half alive.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  38. What about the Kennedy compound? by asmithmd1 · · Score: 1

    I don't think they are going to raid that any time soon

    1. Re:What about the Kennedy compound? by gladbach · · Score: 1

      ... you act as if the kennedys aren't a cult...

      where you been man?

      --
      "Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms,
    2. Re:What about the Kennedy compound? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i thought they were just clones.

  39. EU Software Patent Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For things like this I believe the US needs a court to listen to grevances citizens have from other countries.

  40. Re:I'm too busy thinking about your mom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you're saying a pussyfart from his mom is that cold wind he feels blowing?

    Somebody should tell him that that wasn't the "open" that "open source" was talking about!

  41. They must have thought he was crazy.. by [cx] · · Score: 1, Troll

    After he saw back to the future a few times and thought hey the delorean would make a great car not only for time travel but perpetual motion!

    After all these years I thought perpetual motion was a myth, little did I know it would only take a DeLorean to accomplish this great feat of impossibility.

    Are they still in business?

    Do they know what mister Tilley does with their cars?

    And if Tilley is right, and he does have a secret to energy such as he's claiming, there's no way we'll ever get it since our economy is largely based on the sale of oil. Not to mention the USAs entire government (Republican) gets large amounts of cash for oil. It is not in their interests to have any kind of alternative energy. This may sound like a 'wild, crazy, conspiracy' theory, but if we had the right kind of motivation all across congress and the world we'd have an alternative energy for practical use within 5 years.

    It's just nobody profits from a reusable resource, and with oil everybody profits. Except the consumer.

    It must be great to sell oil, and go to the gas station and get practically free gas. I'm sure GWB has his own gas stations. Haha. And his own car lanes, but anyways power to alternative energy sources, but perpetual motion? Sounds doubtful.

    G'day ladies.

    1. Re:They must have thought he was crazy.. by cybermace5 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Tilley is nothing but a slick huckster. The only thing he did wrong was get too greedy, and not skip out with the cash while he had the chance. Yes, I said cash. That's where all of the investor money was going.

      His little demonstration at the Nashville track last year...the car didn't even make it to theoretical distance available from just the plain car batteries. It had a "problem with the wheel bearing." It was going pretty slow before it stopped, too. Also they'd drive it, stop it to "check on it" and attach a voltmeter so the audience could see that the voltage wasn't going down. In fact, while they had the "voltmeter" terminals connected, the voltage was going up. Proof of an amazing breakthrough I say.

      His "explanation" of the "physics" behind his invention is the same "battery-popper" tripe that "alternative energy" scamsters have been pushing all along. They all involve big capacitors periodically pulsing high voltage into the battery at a certain frequency, which taps into some hitherto unknown energy in the atomic forces. Or some such crap. And it works with cheap, available car batteries! Convenient, because then they can keep the car batteries in plain sight.

      I'd rather buy a Sundance generator. At least those look kind of cool.

      --
      ...
    2. Re:They must have thought he was crazy.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Crazy? No... merely another modder in trouble for hacking hardware without the permission of the owner of that particular IP.

      Sshhh... Don't thell the authorities, but I own a Modded Jeep Wrangler... It doesn't travel thru time or run perpetually (be nice to have better mileage tho), but it does seem to defy gravity on occasion!

    3. Re:They must have thought he was crazy.. by Ashtead · · Score: 1
      In fact, while they had the "voltmeter" terminals connected, the voltage was going up. Proof of an amazing breakthrough I say.

      Or a capacitor or battery recovering after a heavy load has been disconnected. This phenomenon is fairly well known to people doing electronic design, it may not be so well-known to the public at large, and there is definitely a big "gee-whiz" effect to it.

      One good reference I know of is this article by Robert A. Pease.

      --
      SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
    4. Re:They must have thought he was crazy.. by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      "big capacitors"

      Flux capacitors maybe?

  42. Electricity Shortages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe a solution may end up coming in an unlooked direction like IBM or Intel...maybe.

    1. Re:Electricity Shortages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinda like teasing electrons through a complementing complex maze of conducting material using magnetism, except no moving parts.

  43. This whole thing smells fishy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DeLorean?
    Energy Machine?

    Sounds like a plot to get 1.21 GigaWatts!

  44. Not surprised hw companies don't like sw patents. by geekee · · Score: 1

    "Companies like Siemens, IBM, Alcatel and Nokia lead the list of those whose researchers and developpers want to protect programming freedom and copyright property against what they see as a 'patent landgrab.'"

    I'm not impressed by this list of harware companies companies that don;t support software patents. Of course they don't want software patents. Then they'll need to pay for the software to run on their hardware. They'd rather have no sw patents so they can copy the ideas of software designers and screw them out of any profit.

    --
    Vote for Pedro
  45. Software Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Citizens might take vacation, but then Democracy does too. Most of the ugly things the Government
    wants to pass goes through "debate" during the summer, when all the blockbusters are coming on screen and entertainments are making their year profits.
    The only way to know that your representatives are doing a good job is to control their work at all time. It's a matter of citizenship, even if it does mean droping your hollidays for that matter.

  46. Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by Another+MacHack · · Score: 1
    http://www.the-carrot-and-the-stick.com/Best_Pract ices/FAQ/Definition.php

    1.2 Email spam quite simply put is;

    1.2.1. sending email unsolicited to individuals you have no personal relationship with.

    (...)

    1. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by Mark+Ferguson · · Score: 1

      Essentially that is what spam is. We can beat around the bush with different thresholds of volume and/or content but it all comes down to whether or not it is solicited.

      This is the definition of spam in its basest form.

      Questions, suggestions and/or comments?

    2. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unsolicited advertising through an public/private electronic medium(1) without explicit consent.

      (1)email, postings within forums, newsgroups.

    3. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Email spam is ... sending email unsolicited to individuals you have no personal relationship with.

      Hmmm ... That would cover sending a message to a mailing list or a newsgroup, since you rarely have a personal relation with anyone in those fora.

      Guess I'll just have to consider myself a spammer. Just like a year and a half ago, George Dubya taught me that I'm a terrorist, since I don't agree with him.

      It does sorta cheapen a term though, when nearly everyone qualifies.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    4. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by bofh468 · · Score: 1

      How about the "bulkiness" of the message? Sent to one person versus a million?

    5. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by Mark+Ferguson · · Score: 1

      The issue is one of consent and we feel this is the best way to address that issue.

      The content and volume don't mean anything if you abide by the wishes of your intended recipient. If they have not asked for it then don't send it.

      Others may or may not see things the same. We are putting our reputations on the line with every client wish vouch for.

      This has to be done by rules we can live with.

    6. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by Mark+Ferguson · · Score: 1

      No. You and everybody on the list signed up to be on it. This is called Confirmed (Hopefully it was confirmed or it will eventually be abused) OPT-IN. This is not spam. I agree, George Dubya does cheapen the term.

    7. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by bofh468 · · Score: 1

      So how exactly is this going to *stop* spam? Isn't that what blacklists (SPEWS, SpamHaus, et al) are for?

    8. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by Mark+Ferguson · · Score: 1

      The Carrot and the Stick is not a black list. Instead, it is a white list of businesses, bulk emailers and Service Providers that abide by industry standards.

      We will be working with and not against the people that came before us. If you are listed in SPEWS then you must first clean your house before we will list you in the white list. After your delisted you can be listed on the white list. Some will not get the point and some will.

      A white list usually supercedes all black list depending on the comfort level administrators have in our ability to spot spammers before they get white listed.

      The zone transfers for the white list will have security and limitations for accessing it. It is after all a list of mail servers that people will accept email from and spammers could use this to send spam. Sign up for the Service Provider and spam through the white listed mail server.

      We figured this one out early and to prevent this we are considering limiting zone file transfers to either specified IP addresses and/or ID and password. This way we know each time the zone file is transferred and by whom. We can also revoke the transfer at will if it ever becomes needed.

    9. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by jc42 · · Score: 1
      You and everybody on the list signed up to be on it.

      Ah, but this wasn't mentioned in the definition. Recall that it said only:

      ... sending email unsolicited to individuals you have no personal relationship with.

      At least for the mailing lists that I'm on, there was never any human interaction when I signed up. I exchanged messages with some remote software. At no time did I form any sort of "relationship" with any person during this process. I may have formed loose pen-pal type relationships with a few people on the list, but most of the list members are strangers who are just names.

      So by the definition given, anything I send to such a list is spam.

      I'd say this definitely cheapens the term, since it makes memebers of most mailing lists (and anyone who posts to a newsgroup) into spammers.

      There is a real possibility that, if such a definition is enacted into law, most mailing lists and all newsgroups will be among the casualties.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    10. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by bofh468 · · Score: 1

      Intriguing. Aside from the obvious payment, how does one attain a listing on the whitelist? I see the criteria on the website. Who decides if a potential listee meets the criteria?

    11. Re:Pretty damn expansive definition of spam by Mark+Ferguson · · Score: 1

      This decision will be made when we investigate any potential client.

      I also maintain a database, sort of, for a long list of spammers. This will be tapped because this list is unavailable to people that would abuse the inboxes we are trying to keep as usable.

      We are also setting up an alternative system where an individual that runs his/her own mail server but oes only a informational news letter gets a pass on the payment schedule. This isn't about money, it has to be made available to everybody, and some people just can't afford to pay a large sum or even a small sum of money every month or every quarter.

      We are considering a small, unobtrusive ad at the bottom in small text, "White listing provided by The Carrot and the Stick", linked to our site.

  47. Mr. Tilley... by El · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Exactly which part of the Laws of Thermodynamics did you not understand... that energy could be neither created nor destroyed, or that all systems tend towards maximum entropy?

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    1. Re:Mr. Tilley... by hackwrench · · Score: 2, Funny

      Most proponents of ZPE and other such energy generators don't agree with the all systems tend towards maximum entropy part.

    2. Re:Mr. Tilley... by RodgerDodger · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The "Laws of Thermodynamics" are a description of what is observed to happen to gases under experimental conditions. There's no real evidence that they scale out, you know, and a fair bit to hint that they don't. And even if they do apply, we know that they talk about what happens in the long term. They don't apply short-term.

      Hmmm... energy can't be created. What did the Big Bang do, then?

      Hmmm... systems tend towards maximum entropy, but over the medium term (like several billion years), it appears that there's a bias towards increasing complexity, actually.

      I mean, the universe, not long after the Big Bang, was a pretty high-entropy environment. Then things like stars and galaxies started coming out of the mix. And then you can get self-replicating systems that tend towards complexity as well.

      Heck, in any case, even if you can't get perpetual motion, there's nothing say you can't get "several million years" motion, is there? I'd settle for that.

      Besides, you have to realise it's kooks who come up with whacky ideas and find ways to achieve them. The first step to achieving the impossible is to think that "hey, maybe it is possible after all".

      (All that said, I think Tilley was a scam artist)

      --
      "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
    3. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Jardine · · Score: 1

      And they're right...in a way. All systems don't tend towards maximum entropy. Just closed systems. And the only closed system that I know of is our universe (assuming our universe really is closed)

    4. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can "disagree" all they want. But the theory of Entropy has been demonstrated in tens of thousands of experiments, all over the world.

      Have any of these ZPE proponents had one of their theories upheld?

    5. Re:Mr. Tilley... by tundog · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I myself am a skeptic when it comes to absolutes, but if science calls it a LAW, then I'll go alongh with it. The scientific criteria for a law is pretty extreme.

      You see, we scientisits, unlike member of the USB consortium, don't base our conclusions on market surveys...

      Here's a quick review scientific method in order of refutability:

      Hypothesis
      Theory
      Law

      I find you argument that 3 LAWS of theromodynamics are invalid becuase of the big bang laughable.

      You do realize that what you saying boils down to "That scientific law can't be a law becuase of this theory over here", don't you?

      --
      All your base are belong to us!
    6. Re:Mr. Tilley... by El · · Score: 1
      mean, the universe, not long after the Big Bang, was a pretty high-entropy environment.


      I disagree; it was low entropy. Entropy has been increasing ever since. Low entropy means the energy is concentrated in one place; high entropy means it is randomly distributed.


      And then you can get self-replicating systems that tend towards complexity as well.


      That's my definition of "living": any system which disobeys the second law of thermodynamics.

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    7. Re:Mr. Tilley... by iggymanz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      actually, most scientific "laws" are approximations - for example, no real world material obeys Ohm's Law exactly, Boyle's law applies to no real world gas, etc. The difference between hypothesis, theory, and law is vague. As for the laws of thermodynamics, we don't even know if our universe is a closed or open system.....the laws are USEFUL, but are not TRUE in the absolute sense.

    8. Re:Mr. Tilley... by tundog · · Score: 1


      I beg to differ. Real world material DO follow Ohms law exactly. It is only our inability to make scientific measurements with infinite precision that results in a certain margin of error. Until we can measure solids accuratly to the atom electron (quark?) you'll have to pay attention to those little silver and gold stripes on your resistors.

      --
      All your base are belong to us!
    9. Re:Mr. Tilley... by RodgerDodger · · Score: 1

      Actually, most scientific theories called Laws are relics of the 19th century or earlier. Hence, for example, Newton's Laws of Motion and Gravity, all of which were found to be approximations. We don't call them Laws these days, we call them theories (such as the theory of relativity... it was special relativity that superseded the Laws of Motion and Gravity).

      Heck, under some of those theories, some of the Laws refer to things that don't exist. For example, gravity isn't a force, but a curvature in space-time, according to special relativity.

      Oh, and I never said that the Laws of Thermodynamics were invalid; I said that they were a description of what we have seen experimentally to occur. That doesn't mean you can't violate them, just that we haven't worked out how to do it (while the Universe may have...)

      --
      "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
    10. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Ramze · · Score: 2, Informative
      Actually, the law is more like: energy can't be created or destroyed in the sense of "energy from nothing" and "nothing to energy", but it CAN be converted into matter -- and matter can be converted into energy. E=Mc^2 is the formula for conversion... and during an atomic explosion, a minute amount of matter is converted into energy -- just as a densely compact point of matter/energy exploded in the "big bang" and released an enormous amount of energy and proto-matter.

      The only experiment I know of that seems to defy this law is called the cassimir effect where two charged plates in a vaccuum tend to move towards each other even though the charges should repel them. I believe it was explained as some sort of quantum effect of particles and antiparticles appearing within the vaccuum and bouncing around putting pressure on the plates. (I believe its based on an antiparticle and particle emerging at once, bouncing around, then anhialating each other out of existence over and over). I don't put much faith in quantum theories, though.

      If there is an exception to the law, I bet it's such as mall effect as to be nearly unmeasurable -- certainly not enough to allow for enough energy to propel an automobile indefinitely. Unless this guy is reabsorbing heat, using some form of alternator, and using braking power to recharge the batteries, I can't imagine how he'd get even a fraction of the power back into the system he's using for motion.

      It'll be interesting to see what the feds turn up. I think if the guy was legit, he'd have patented his idea and showed it off to the public by now if it is a perpetual motion machine.

      One of my engineering professors said that thousands of people have applied for patents on supposed perpetual motion machines & even more had created businesses that suckered people into investing in such ideas, but there's always a flaw in the design b/c you just can't beat the laws of conservation of matter & energy (other than converting one to the other). If there's motion, there must be energy powering it somehow & if you're powering a motor with electricity, then that electrical potential will be converted to mechanical motion and heat. There's no way to convert 100% of that mechanical motion and heat back into electricity, so I see no way for his magic box to recover the energy the vehicle used. The only alternatives I can imagine that are practical are... he's cheating and recharging the vehicle somehow, or he has another power source.

      I admit there's a one in a trillion chance the wacko tapped into the power of a black hole in another universe to recharge his electric car, but... I doubt it ;-) Even then, it wouldn't be perpetual. It'd just have an emensely powerful power supply... Hey, who needs batteries when ya got that kinda power? lol.

    11. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Zey · · Score: 0
      Hmmm... energy can't be created. What did the Big Bang do, then?

      In the Einsteinian physics world, energy can only be created by the destruction of matter. Which certainly was going on at the Big Bang.

      However, I believe there also suggestions from string theory that the events leading up to the Big Bang event may have also transferred mass/energy to the dimensions we're capable of sensing from those we normally can't.

      See this page for some well presented info.

    12. Re:Mr. Tilley... by RodgerDodger · · Score: 1

      Most models of the Big Bang have energy pretty randomly distributed over the entire universe. Admittedly, the universe was a lot smaller in those days.

      According to the theory, matter coalesced out of the primidal (and extremely high entropy) soup as the universe expanded and cooled off, at the ripe old age of about 10^-43 seconds. This was obviously a decrease of entropy; matter represents a greater concentration of energy than plasma does.

      About 3 minutes in, the matter started forming into matter; still greater concentration. A few hundred thousand years later, there were stars and galaxies forming. In fact, arguably, at the cosmic scale, the universe has done nothing but become more and more organised, in direct violation of the Laws of Thermodynamics. Sure, that may change one day, but 15 billion-odd years of violating the Law means it's not much of a Law, is it? I mean, by comparision, P2P filesharers are upstanding citizens and great respecters of copyright.

      The Laws of Thermodynamics apply to the motion of particles in a fluid, and the transfer of heat in said fluid. You take it out of that context, and you're no longer playing in the right arena.

      --
      "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
    13. Re:Mr. Tilley... by mesterha · · Score: 1

      I disagree; it was low entropy. Entropy has been increasing ever since. Low entropy means the energy is concentrated in one place; high entropy means it is randomly distributed.

      Just to be a trouble-maker, how do you define the size of the space. If the size of the space that holds the energy is changing then you can lower the entropy. How is the size of the universe defined?

      --

      Chris Mesterharm
    14. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      Ah, but entropy depends on your point of view.

      Don't beleive me? Look at the universe; best theories state that we're going from a highly ordered state to a chaotic state. But looking at the big bang theory, we see a singularity with infinite temperature and infinite pressure (which I'd say is quite a chaotic environment) leading to what we see now; planets and solar systems and galacies and clusters and globular clusters; a highly ordered state of affairs.

      And looking at the temperature, it seems as if the universe has already experienced 'heat death'...a quite consistent 3 Kelvin...again, a quite ordered state.

      Anyway, that still doesn't change the fact that all our observations of the universe point to the fact that perpetual motion machines aren't feasable.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    15. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I call all those suns much more concentrated than the big bang; true, you had all energy in one place...but then again, you had all places in one place :)

      Fact remeains, that there is much more structure to be observed in the current universe than when it was a singlularity.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    16. Re:Mr. Tilley... by nathanh · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I beg to differ. Real world material DO follow Ohms law exactly.

      Actually, they don't. Laws are only ever approximations.

      It is only our inability to make scientific measurements with infinite precision that results in a certain margin of error.

      As our measurements improve we typically need to find new laws. For example, Newtonian physics was replaced by Einstein's physics purely because improvements in measurements started turning up things that didn't match the previous model. In other words, you've got it exactly backwards.

    17. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I don't know where to start on this post, so I'll just respond nasty to your first line.

      Ah, but entropy depends on your point of view.

      The point of view of a scientist or some moron on slashdot. One of them is right and consistent.

    18. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I call all those suns much more concentrated than the big bang; true, you had all energy in one place...but then again, you had all places in one place :)

      Fact remeains, that there is much more structure to be observed in the current universe than when it was a singlularity.


      This turns out not to be correct. The entropy of a system relates to the number of possible states that system can take, or alternatively the number of degrees of freedom in that system. If all matter and energy is in one location, the number of degrees of freedom is a lot more limited.

      For a more detailed explanation, ask your local physics professor.

    19. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... energy can't be created. What did the Big Bang do, then?

      In the Einsteinian physics world, energy can only be created by the destruction of matter. Which certainly was going on at the Big Bang.

      Actually, the creation of matter was happening at the big bang. Matter as we know it condensed out of the high-energy primordial soup as it cooled off.

      If I understand correctly, the idea is that the universe had zero net energy at formation, and so was allowed to spontaneously appear out of nothing. The energy of its contents (positive) was perfectly balanced by its gravitational potential energy (negative).

      How inflation and other scalar fields (e.g. "dark energy") mesh with this is something you'd have to ask an astrophysicist about.

    20. Re:Mr. Tilley... by clare-ents · · Score: 1

      "
      The "Laws of Thermodynamics" are a description of what is observed to happen to gases under experimental conditions. There's no real evidence that they scale out, you know, and a fair bit to hint that they don't. And even if they do apply, we know that they talk about what happens in the long term. They don't apply short-term.
      "

      Okay, lets think about this more closely,

      The three laws of Thermodynamics.

      1: Energy is conserved.
      2: Entropy may only increase
      3: Absolute Zero may not be attained.

      Let's look at them in more detail.

      1: Energy is conserved.

      Originally discovered in the context of mechanics, seems to be true for gases, electomagnetism, nuclear reactions, quantum mechanics. It seems to have been confimed in pretty much every physics experiment.

      2: Entropy may only increase

      This can also be restated as 'heat may not of it's own accord pass from a cold object to a hotter object'. As for systems biasing to complexity they offset this by creating much more disorder as waste.

      3: Absolute zero may not be attained.

      It hasn't been, and the predictions for dealing with very low temperatures have been bourne out the predictions for the amount of other energy that must be converted into heat to make it work.

      As for it being the kooks who come up with whacky ideas and achieve them, to misquote Carl Sagan 'they laughed at Einstien, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.'

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
    21. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 1
      How inflation and other scalar fields (e.g. "dark energy") mesh with this is something you'd have to ask an astrophysicist about.

      Like they would know...

      My magic eight ball can give me answers with the same level of certainty that anyone could answer questions such as these right now. Heck, we don't even know all of the forces we are dealing with here. We only recently observed that the Universe is expanding at an increasing rate, quite opposite of what we understood as even possible.

      They may be able to tell you what is observed, but the How that you mention will only get you blank stares.

      --
      the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    22. Re:Mr. Tilley... by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      Well, that was informative...well thoought out, too. Clearly debated also...

      Too bad I am in training to be a scientist (technical physics to be exact), so my point is at least worthy of debate, because I do have some understanding of the subject matter.

      You on the other hand are posting as an AC without any refutaion visible in your post. But then again, you're probably consistent :)

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    23. Re:Mr. Tilley... by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      No, I would encourage you to look in a physical chemistry handbook for potential/current plots of real world materials and how they deviate from ohm's law. The first thing you will note is that the graphs are CURVES and not even LINES!! The differences from linearity can be quite large (> 10%) and have nothing to do with experimental error. Some materials even have current *decrease* as applied potential increases. Anyway, the relationship is a much more complicated function for even near-linear materials. There are also more variables involved - a real world material has its resistance change with temperature and pressure, for example.

      Ohm's law (and many other laws in linear equation forms) are really just the first term of a Taylor's series expansion of a polynomial approximation, nothing more.

      Or to take chemistry as an example, do you really think one mole of oxygen gas and two moles of hydrogen will combine to produce one mole of water? No, in the real world some of the gasses will not react at all, and some hydrogen peroxide (and even higher order oxides) will be produced. So 02 + 2H2 -> 2H20 is an approximation too.

  48. "Up to 40X Faster" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That reminds me the Monty Python body building ad parody where ad claims gain up to 40 lbs and the disclaimer states that the term "up to 40 lbs" clearly includes naught.

    1. Re:"Up to 40X Faster" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      That was ( I think, they may have reused the joke ) Llap Goch - Secret Welsh Martial Art page from the Papperbok. You can see it online here.

      Exact copy is ( in caps ): "Go to bed with up to any ludicrous number of girls you care to think of providing you realise this statement is quite meaningless as the phrase "up to" clearly includes the number "nought"."

      In my opinion, this is one of the funniest things they ever came up with.

  49. Possibility of being sued ...PPVP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I also do not play movies with the windows open for fear that there may be an unlicensed viewer watching through the window. Let us all do our part to protect "intellectual property" and screw free expression."

    Screw "free expression" and charge everyone else to watch.

  50. this what the EU dudes plan to do by BigBadDude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...pass the law and get some patents before americans patent everything that is patentable (and beyond)

  51. Re:Moderation by visualight · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    To which I replied:

    "Now that's funny."

    at plus 2. Immediately some moderator is modding down the entire thread to -1. The thing was funny. My reply was ontopic.

    I don't know who the moderator is, but I hope he meets the "IF I EVER MEET YOU ILL BEAT YOUR ASS" guy. Where's he been anyway?

    --
    Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
  52. It's good shit, really! by twitter · · Score: 1

    Terrorists can't beat a system like that. No matter what fake name they chose, they are on the list. That no one else can fly is just a small inconvenience. The terrorists will never win this one.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:It's good shit, really! by The+Cydonian · · Score: 0

      Since when did terrorists travel under their *real* names?

    2. Re:It's good shit, really! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For that matter, when did terrorists do anything to the US other than the USS Cole incident?

      If you actually look at the plane as it hits the WTC, it's painfully obvious that it was packed with explosives. Do you know how little airframe was found? Acording to the official story, it all burned away. Never mind that airplane fuel doesn't burn nearly hot enough melt the airframe or harm the structure of the WTC, let alone to burn either of them.

      There is also no possible way that the hole in the pentagon was caused by an airplane. The hole was a nice, neat, round hole with very little wreckage. Not many airplanes I know of can do that. They all tend to either leave much larger holes when the wings pass through the thing being hit or they leave A LOT of wreckage when the wings shear off.

      I'm not very well displsed towards our government. Could you tell? Normally, I'm not anything even remotely resembling a conspiracy theorist, but the facts sure point to something other than what the government told us.

    3. Re:It's good shit, really! by Everybody · · Score: 1

      Since when did terrorists travel under their *real* names?

      NOW I understand! That is the trick! The terrorists will be the only ones choosing names that are NOT on the list!

    4. Re:It's good shit, really! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're clearly a nutcase, but here's a thought, the USS Cole attack wasn't terrorism. It's part of the fcuking millitary, not civilian.

  53. Alternatives to SOUNDEX ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    has anyone got a simple(ish) alternative to soundex ? or is soundex the best public domain sound-a-like algo we have ?

  54. Re:Not surprised hw companies don't like sw patent by poptones · · Score: 1

    Do you really know all the ventures where Siemens operates? Calling them and IBM "hardware companies" is like calling Disney "a company that sells cartoons."

  55. Schroedinger's cat is DEAD. by algernon7 · · Score: 1

    Last time I checked, anyway...

  56. Delorian by mini+me · · Score: 5, Funny

    The DeLorian may be a perpetual machine, but it's maximum speed is 87mph. Anything over that and the car mysteriously disappears.

  57. Patents are law like everything else by hayden · · Score: 4, Informative
    A patent is a legal entitlement just like copyright, property ownership etc. Basically it is (or was originally) a government sanctioned monopoly on your invention. By patenting your idea the government gives you exclusive rights to work said invention. In exchange you or somebody else at your discretion has to work the invention or the patent lapses (in theory anyway, this doesn't happen very much) and you agree to release the invention into the public domain after a period of time so anybody can make it. This protects you from somebody seeing your invention and copying it and gives the public the advantage of your invention.

    Governments drew a line in the sand at what can and can't be patented. Discoveries can't (ie you can't patent Newtons laws) and algorithms can't either (which is why up until recently it was required to discribe software as an invention comprising of a computer with said computer having of display unit, random access memory, etc etc and then start talking about your software as part of this computer invention).

    The reason to not allow software patents follows in the same theme. Is it or is it not in the best interest of the public to allow patenting of software? Most software people would probably say no but unfortunately what's in the public interest and what makes money generally don't coincide.

    --
    Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
  58. They don't need to.... by fm6 · · Score: 3, Funny

    They're all dead!

  59. Re:USB Mess - blind cant see that logo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > looks like everything should make perfect sense
    Yeah, it "looks."
    Now someone tells me - I gotta find a sighted individual
    every time I want to make a USB purchase. Fsck.

  60. double opt in? by jovlinger · · Score: 1

    huh?

    At least the double opt in website was consistent with the write up: made no sense whatsoever. If I were a telemarketer, that would do very little to sway me either way.

    My head spins too.

  61. What's wrong, energy man? by yet+another+coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Witnesses saw investigators "haul off Tilley's electric DeLorean, his electric boat and an electric ATV."

    Of course they had to haul off his vehicles. No intelligent person could expect them to be driven under their own power. ;-)

  62. Re:Moderation by Poeir · · Score: 2, Funny

    He's gone to meet people.

    --
    Sigs are like bumper stickers.
  63. You are incorrect. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The DeLorean's top speed with time circuits on would be 87.999999999...mph. With time circuits off, you could probably go up above 100.

  64. My First Patent.... by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 1

    "A system or collection of software functions and/or programs which instruct a computer's processing unit(s) to perform a specified task or set of tasks defined by either a human operator or another computer system or software."

    There that should cover just about anything you can do with a computer (aside from using it as a paper weight or a foot rest...)

    --
    We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
    1. Re:My First Patent.... by LittleBigLui · · Score: 1
      There that should cover just about anything you can do with a computer


      Sounds fair.

      (aside from using it as a paper weight or a foot rest...)


      I'll patent those then.
      --
      Free as in mason.
  65. Black box by bluegreenone · · Score: 1

    This story sounds almost identical to that of Madison Priest's "Magic Box". Basically the guy promised this pie-in-the-sky high-quality video delivery system over regular phone lines. He would demo it but would never let anyone inspect the equipment or see the device. Turns out he was just using a VCR and hiding a cable in the power cord. He got plenty out of investors.

    1. Re:Black box by prockcore · · Score: 3, Funny

      Turns out he was just using a VCR and hiding a cable in the power cord.

      That's what always cracked me up. What did his investors say after they saw his demonstration?

      "Wow, your streaming video solution is amazing, but how do I adjust the tracking?"

    2. Re:Black box by Animats · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that was cute. He replaced the ground pin of the power plug with a coaxial cable, so he could say "look, the only cable is the power cord".

    3. Re:Black box by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The big difference there is that Madison Priest's claims sounded plausible.

      It really is quite remarkable how many scams are based on entirely unbelievable claims.

  66. Ob. Simpsons reference by gotr00t · · Score: 1

    Homer: "Lisa, in this house, we obey the laws of THERMODYNAMICS!"

  67. Re:Moderation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He met Old Ike.

    They now live together in a small town in Georgia, running a diner by day, and training parrots at night.

  68. Good Exit Strategy For Tech Crackpots by istartedi · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you're a tech crackpot claiming something impossible like PM, then getting raided by the Feds is the ideal exit strategy.

    If done properly, you can create a cult of dreamers and conspiracy theorists who will claim the Feds stole and suppressed your technology.

    Be sure to study the laws carefully before choosing this course. Choose something likely to net you less than a year in prison. Get a good lawyer. Chances are this is your first offense, so you should get off easy. However, be mindful of the judge who might try to "make an example out of you". Be cool while your case is pending. You don't want to get "Mitnicked".

    Then when you get out you do the circuit of late night talk radio, alternative newspapers, self-published newsletters, websites, books, and even college campus talks. Unless you're really famous you won't be rolling in dough from this; but you can survive and within certain circles there will be lots of people happy to give you free meals.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Good Exit Strategy For Tech Crackpots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? You've never heard of the afternoon? Well then, pull up a stool and let me tell you of the wonders you are missing.

  69. Magic Box? by gotr00t · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Everyone knows descriptions as vague as a "magic box" is the heart of all hoaxes. Like Madison Priest from Florida. APPARENTLY, his "magic box" could supposedly transfer data over a phone line at phenomenial rates. Despite the fact that he almost NEVER drew complete schematics of his "work", and all demonstrations were in controlled environments, many companies were willing to invest in his efforts, even though he made a lot of lame excuses as to why he didn't meet deadlines, etc.

    Finally, he was convicted, but the ironic thing is, it was drug-related. In this nation, is it really that hard to convict someone of fraud, even when it's that apparent?

    Moreover, when do people ever learn? I didn't read Tilly's website real carefully, but he seems to claim that this is a car that generates electricity, but takes no electricity OR gasoline. Something about that is very hard to believe, yet, many people have invested. Apparently, they didn't bother asking for a fuel source, and just went on, hoping that the laws of thermodynamics would not hold true or something. Instead of a lawyer, these people should hire a physicist before investing in such things.

    Sure, there are "trade secrets", but then again, sometimes it's a curtain for a scheme to take place. That's what patents are for. If you have a brilliant idea, patent it. Then, you have nothing to fear as you reveal your brilliant idea to the world.

  70. Dude, you *really* need a tinfoil hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nuf said.

  71. And I will foil the Sailor Scouts! by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    We need all that soul-fragmentation energy to power the massive submarine batteries in the you-know-whats that only last for five friggen minutes.

    Or we can power a fleet of electric Beetles. Deloreans are too heavy. Hmm... either way, we win.

    Prepare to die, Sailor Sluts!

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  72. Schroedinger's cat? What about Francesco? by SEWilco · · Score: 1

    But is Generalissimo Francesco Franco still dead? Has anyone opened the box?

  73. Re:Moderation by visualight · · Score: 0

    This means WAR!

    I'm sorry, but I just can't seem to take this seriously.

    --
    Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
  74. Re: plurals of compound terms by thing12 · · Score: 2, Informative
    The only other example I can think of is "court martial".

    You just have to love the Internet:

    When a noun is hyphenated with an adverb or preposition, the plural is formed on the noun.

    comings-in, fillers-in, goings-on, hangers-on, listeners-in, lookers-on, markers-up, passers-by, swearers-in

    When neither word is a noun, the plural is formed on the last word.

    also-rans, come-ons, go-betweens, higher-ups, run-ins, tie-ins

    In forming the plurals of compound terms, the significant word takes the plural form.

    Significant word first:

    adjutants general, aides-de-camp, ambassadors at large, attorneys at law, attorneys general, billets-doux, bills of fare, brothers-in-law, charges d'affaires, chiefs of staff, commanders in chief, comptrollers general, consuls general, courts-martial, crepes suzette, daughters-in-law, governors general, grants-in-aid, heirs at law, inspectors general, men-of-war, ministers-designate, mothers-in-law, notaries public, pilots-in-command, postmasters general, presidents-elect, prisoners of war, reductions in force, rights-of-way, secretaries general, sergeants at arms, sergeants major, solicitors general, surgeons general

    Significant word in middle:

    assistant attorneys general, assistant chiefs of staff, assistant comptrollers general, assistant surgeons general

    Significant word last:

    assistant attorneys, assistant commissioners, assistant corporation counsels, assistant directors, assistant general counsels, brigadier generals, deputy judges, deputy sheriffs, general counsels, judge advocates, judge advocate generals, lieutenant colonels, major generals, provost marshals, provost marshal generals, quartermaster generals, trade unions, under secretaries, vice chairmen

    Both words equally significant:

    Bulletins Nos. 27 and 28, (not Bulletin Nos. 27 and 28), (but Bulletin No. 27 or 28), coats of arms, masters at arms, men buyers, men employees, secretaries-treasurers, women aviators

    No word significant in itself:

    forget-me-nots, hand-me-downs, jack-in-the-pulpits, man-of-the-earths, pick-me-ups, will-o'-the-wisps
  75. um, ya right by Dan9999 · · Score: 1

    from an example that I can recall in recent history, claiming weapons of mass destruction and not finding them wouldn't have changed anything. The smarter animals on the Animal Farm (the pink ones) would have changed the writing on the barn.

    A donkey can remember and know the truth, but cannot do anything. (was it a donkey? I can't remember)

  76. Vote on software patentability delayed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to linuxfr the vote has been definitly delayed to september.

  77. RTFA:Of course his "compound" was raided by MickLinux · · Score: 3, Funny

    If anybody would have bothered to read the article, you'd know that his "compound" wasn't raided; his "complex" was raided.

    As a sometime English teacher, I must remind you that the difference between a "compound" and "complex" is huge: compounds have all the required parts in each section. Complexes have multiple instances of the same required parts, together

    That said, more than I'm inclined to believe our government raided him for making false statements to his investors [ummm, let's look at exhibit A, Kenneth Lay], I'm inclined to believe that our government thinks he violated the 2nd law of thermo, and can produce energy for free, and wants in on the action [exhibit B, Iraq].

    Idjits. [But we always knew that].

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    1. Re:RTFA:Of course his "compound" was raided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Grief, you must think the government is really dumb. The answer is, of course, that they think he's profiting from making false statements to his investors without giving the Republican party their cut...

  78. Tilley hype - Flash animation by Animats · · Score: 2, Informative
    Check out this hype from the Tilley Foundation. Best Make Money Fast animation in a while.

    This guy only made $500K off his scheme, over more than a decade. This was a low-rent scam. Makes me wonder if he believed his own hype. There are easier ways to make $50K/year.

    1. Re:Tilley hype - Flash animation by qbwiz · · Score: 1

      Maybe he overestimated the gullibility of the average person. Seems hard to believe, though.

      --
      Ewige Blumenkraft.
  79. Cold fusion probably *is* possible, but not easy by MickLinux · · Score: 1

    ... just not the way the University of Utah claimed, and it's definitely not easy.

    To get cold fusion, you need a molecule with few enough degrees of freedom, and an explosive bond that will get to hydrogen nuclei within the tunnelling distance, say, with a 1% chance of tunnelling.

    Do that, and you will end up with successful cold fusion.

    However, to make this molecule would take tons of design first using chemistry modellers; then you'd have to figure out a way to assemble the parts, and finally how to activate the explosive bond.

    It is not easy. Yes, I can imagine that this guy could do something of the sort. But if he did, then why hide it? Why not just sign up as a member of the American Physical Society, and then bring it in, and say "look. Check the radiation when I heat it up past 40 degrees...." and so on.

    I don't think this guy has found cold fusion.

    But yes, I do consider it quite possible that the government raided him because they think he has something valuable and wish to steal it, and less likely that they raided him because he was defrauding investors.

    On the other hand, maybe he defrauded the wrong investors. That seems to be the theme these days: it's not what you do, it's who you do it to, who benefits, who's hurt, which is important.

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
  80. Oh Great - I share a soundex with Al-Quaida by EnglishTim · · Score: 1

    My name has the same soundex as Saif al-Adil, who is apprently one of Al-Quaida's most senior operatives.

    Well, I can tell my next trip to visit my fiancee's family in Washington DC is going to be fun...

  81. I can supply tin foil at very good prices by EnglishTim · · Score: 1

    I think you'll need a lot for your hat.

  82. Usually perpetual motion scams just explode... by kobotronic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I bet that getting his machines hauled away by the feds was probably not in the plan. They'll have some certified engineer take a glance at the black boxes and he'll the discover garden variety lead batteries hidden behind the "Flux Capacitor" panel where all the flashing LEDs are mounted. Scam over. He'll probably try again in a few years. Probably not with a DeLorean next time.

    Most of these schemes end with the Device mysteriously exploding on the big demo day just about the time the battery woulda run out. (The 'bad wheel bearing' thing on the race track demo seems to coincide with this pattern nicely. I recall one such demo where an onlooker got hurt or killed by the mandatory demo day explosion.

    Anyway, it's interesting that he had more than one vehicle. If he was intending to demo them all at the same time, that would have seemed to preclude a plausible demo day explosion unless the whole fucking garage was supposed to blow...

    It stands to reason that a genuine free energy invention would be a monumental world-changing discovery. Why tinker on a silly little gadget car in the garage, funded only by petty donations by smalltime individual investors? Think big! Nikola Tesla partnered with Westinghouse and demo'ed his monumental, world-changing Alternating Current system by harnessing the hydro power of the Niagara Falls, powering thousands of homes.

    Only a fool throws a dollar after a black box.

    Tesla had a system that actually worked, with both theories, engineering drawings and elaborate patent papers to back them up. At no point were Westinghouse and other corporate investors required to just believe his word when he claimed that his system worked. He let anyone visit his lab and play with his machines, none of which were black boxes.

    Patents, obnoxious such as they are, provide adequate protection against asset hijacking, the 'big secret' can be out in the open and well known, and you can still be the one who makes all the money from it.

  83. Schroedinger's cat dead at 68... by hplasm · · Score: 1

    ..well, it was1935. They don't live for ever, you know..

    --
    ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
  84. Poor USian.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... nobody loves you.

    Did you know that in most EU countries you can't buy adds on TV?

    Did you know that the political parites can;t accept companies' contributions?

    Di you know that the European comission has struck down big mergers due to competition concerns?

    Look little USie, USia is not evil (not its people, we will talk about politicians another day) but in modern Europe democracy is a real way of life, not a pretense in which the rich and powerful pretend to represent the people.

    As for Africa and Latin America being victims, look pal, the US has invaded most countries in Latin America one time or another and has crashed elected goverments and even has created puppet countries (Panama). You will never understand the damage colonialism has done, it is very easy to dismiss the state of victimhood of the African continent unless you live there and you learn all what the colonial power have done (and continue to do in some instances) to the African people.

    Just a quick example: Mobute in Congo was the best buddy of the US during the cold war. A fucking genocidal cleptocrat. Why the US did not find an ally with democratic credentials is your guess, but that "friendship" allow that tyrant to brutalize his people for a couplke of decades. If I was a congolese I would feel agravated and would put some amount of blame in the US foreign policy.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Poor USian.... by Everybody · · Score: 1

      > Did you know that in most EU countries you can't buy adds on TV?

      You probably mean ads, and you probably do not live in the same EU I live in.

      > Did you know that the political parites can't accept companies' contributions?

      You mean they should not, but they do. Anyway, I think companies in the US aren't legally allowed to contribute neither, but read John Grisham's The Brethren if you want to learn how they can contribute anyway (through PACs or something).

      I think the condescending tone is uncalled for, and I say that as a non-'USie'. Problems like corruption affect us all, in the whole world, and if you look at Arlene McCarthies (UK) pro-software patent stance - against the voices of over 150.000 developers - I fear that not all of our EU polititians are committed to the common good.

  85. You are mistaken. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Politics don't work like that in the EU. Pressure groups of organized citizens (NGOs, unions) have as much weight as big corps, this is thanks to strict laws on campaign financing which don't make politicians slaves of their donors.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  86. Which is the way progress is achieved. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You can copyright an implementation of an idea, that is not going away.

    But patenting ideas is just plain stupid. You should be able to patent physical things, but patenting software is akin to patenting mathematics, i.i plain stupid.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Which is the way progress is achieved. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea of programmers having the same rights as an author sounds cool, the only modification to the concept is those rights could never really be given away

  87. Re:A perpetual motion cat? by adamofgreyskull · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hmmm...so what if a door were suspended and a dog placed on one side of it. Wouldn't the door start to rotate so that the dog was always on the wrong side of it??

    Brings to mind another perpetual motion idea: As buttered toast always lands butter side down, and a cat always lands on it's feet..if you strap a piece of buttered toast to a cat's back and drop it, the cat will continue to rotate in mid-air in perpetuity. :)

  88. Soundex failed :-) by KingRamsis · · Score: 1

    I tried Asshole and that what I got:
    Accala Accola Achille Ackley Acly Acquilla Agcaoili Agel Agle Aguallo Aguele Aguila Aichele Ajello Akal Akel Akley Aquil Asaeli Asal Ascol Asel Ashely Ashley Ashly Ashwell Asiello Asley Assael Auckley Augello Augle Aujla Ausiello Ausley Axel Axley Azoulay Azulay Achilles

  89. Delorean. by wwwssabbsdotcom · · Score: 1

    "When this baby hits 88 Miles Per Hour, you're going to see some SERIOUS SHIT!"

    -Doc Brown

    Nice choice in cars for the unit tho. Sportier than a Honda Insight.

    --
    Relive the BBS Past - One Byte at a Time! www.ssabbs.com
  90. Re:A perpetual motion cat? by DJPenguin · · Score: 1

    Brings to mind another perpetual motion idea: As buttered toast always lands butter side down, and a cat always lands on it's feet..if you strap a piece of buttered toast to a cat's back and drop it, the cat will continue to rotate in mid-air in perpetuity. :)

    You'd also have to make the sure the carpet was sufficiently expensive to ensure the toast *always* landed butter side down. And find some way of clearing up the cat puke.

  91. Obligatory Back to the future quote... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You built a perpetual-motion machine... out of a DeLorean?

  92. Perpetual Motion by stinkydog · · Score: 1

    I have constructed a device that requires no external energy input, has minumal mechanical complexity and is capable of speeds in excess of 500,000 Miles per hour. Want to invest? Of cousre to observe this you need to stop rotating around the Milky Way.

    In the universe:
    "Everythings Relative"

    In West Virginia:
    "Everyones Relatives"

    SD

    --
    âoeWho knew something as harmless as willful ignorance could end up having real consequences?â
  93. Hmm, not so sure about that. by gosand · · Score: 2, Funny
    If you don't have a "compound, you're not a "cult leader". And if you're not a "cult leader", you're not allocated any "devoted followers". And if you don't have any "devoted followers" how are you supposed to get a date?

    Does Linus have a compound?

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  94. Well, does he need to be very slick? by gosand · · Score: 1
    Tilley is nothing but a slick huckster.

    Well, he doesn't have to be that slick. He is from Tennessee after all.

    Hey maw, come look at this crazy batrey powrd cor! And brang the mattress money, we'z gonna make us an investment.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  95. Links to all MEPs contact info by while(true) · · Score: 1

    Here is a link to the official list of all MEPs by country and political grouping. All MEPs have a good contact page that can be reached by following the links on this page.

  96. Exactly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Unfortunately the laws of thermodynamics are based on human observation and humans make mistakes."

    Its like I've been telling the bank.

    I have $1000 I put into the bank. I should be able to write as many checks against that $1000, because the $1000 is only electronic and doesn't exist.

    But its only because of limited understanding of the rules of accounting this can't occur.

    Sort of like a lot of people want to believe that 2 + 2 is 4. But its 5. Only our limited understanding of the laws of arithmetic keep believing that 2+2 is 4. It might be 7. We just don't know.

    1. Re:Exactly! by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I trust that this is silliness. But incase it isn't:

      No system is ultimately trustworthy. People make mistakes, and they have an inherrent bias to make some mistakes more frequently than others.

      So we believe that basic arithmetic is correct, when applied to the formal system known as integer arithmetic. But we can't be totally certain.

      OTOH, when we apply it outside the realm of the purely formal system, say to money, the ammount of uncertainty increases. ("2+2=4? What about my interest?" "Oh, yeah, What about my service charges!")

      But money is, itself, a largely formal system. When we map it onto a system that we didn't totally construct, we get surprises.

      Consider:
      1 cup fluid + 1 cup fluid = ?

      what if they were fuming HNO3 and NH40?
      what if they were Everclear and water?
      what if...
      so there is a problem in how the mapping is constructed. We do the best we can, but we can't be sure we did it correctly. So the decutions from math applied to physical systems are always less certain then when applied only to the math. And we don't know by how much. We can only estimate.

      I'm sorry if this makes you uncomfortable, but it's the way things are. Perpetual Motion of the first kind is quite unlikely. Perpetual Motion of the second kind is...dubious. Perpetual Motion of the third kind is well known. Life is a good example of that. (Yes, it isn't really perpetual. But it's close enough that it gets called that.) This category also includes tide motors, windmills, hydroelectrics, etc.

      Perpetual motion of the second kind is probably achievable via quantuum trickery. Or possibly not. Consider the problems with reading out the answer from the zero-energy consuming computers that were (theoretically) proposed.

      And perpetual motion of the first kind (which is what this car would have to be) is probably impossible. But do note the qualifier.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:Exactly! by nathanh · · Score: 1
      Sort of like a lot of people want to believe that 2 + 2 is 4. But its 5. Only our limited understanding of the laws of arithmetic keep believing that 2+2 is 4. It might be 7. We just don't know.

      Don't be silly. Mathematics is a formal system that humans have invented. We can *define* 2+2=4. The laws of thermodynamics aren't derived or defined; they were observed. The only reason we claim that "the entropy in a closed system always increases" is because we've never found the counterexample. We don't know why that law is "true". We don't even know that law *is* "true". We just think that law is true because everything we've observed so far points in that direction.

      Science is not a precise system. It is a bunch of observations written in a way that scientists can argue over the specifics.

  97. Notes on Tilley by SolemnDragon · · Score: 2, Informative
    Here is a good page of random tilley stuff, including his ad hominem attacks on his critics. here are photos of a Tilley Vehicle from various angles.

    the photos of the various parts and signage for his 'building power system' are here. I think it's the book 'Voodoo Science' that includes a chapter on it, also? (i think. Have to go home and check.) But this guy's a treat. I'm not surprised to find out about the heist. I AM alarmed that this guy has any credibility at all, but i guess there's always someone willing to believe...

  98. re:. You cannot prove a negative. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2+2?5

  99. maryland driver's license numbers by morcheeba · · Score: 1

    The soundex is part of my maryland number, too:

    S-sss-###-###-###

    Where S-sss is the soundex (and I thought the first digit was an 'M' for maryland, but it's really part of the Soundex for Morcheeba!)

    It's better than VA where the driver's license number was your SSN

    1. Re:maryland driver's license numbers by D0wnsp0ut · · Score: 1

      Actually, you can elect to *not* have your SSN on your license. There's a check box on the application.

      --
      "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither!"
  100. About recall votes by MickLinux · · Score: 1

    A recall vote is essentially when enough people get a petition together to "recall" a politician, then the politician is no longer authorized to act on the people's behalf, and there must be a new election. That new election can reinstall the pol, or not, but it definitely is a sign that a major fraction of the people are dissatisfied with the pol.

    I saw some British Lord demanded a recall of some MEP under Google, but I don't see a lot about recalling MEPs. Still, it should be possible to find out, shouldn't it?

    Or are democratic processes strictly verboten?

    Regarding socialists and conservatives, the Republicans call themselves conservatives and are all the time railing against "socialism", but if you see what they vote for, they are definitely socialists. The socialists meanwhile rail against the Republicans, but if you see what they vote for, it is the same thing as the Republicans. So really they are identical. My brother (a conservative libertarian) calls it socialist, my uncle (a strongly liberal green) calls it fascist. They're both right.

    Here in Europe, the Socialist and Conservative leadership were working together to try to push the software patents through on the fast track. It makes me think maybe they're becoming the same party.

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    1. Re:About recall votes by Halo1 · · Score: 1
      Here in Europe, the Socialist and Conservative leadership were working together to try to push the software patents through on the fast track. It makes me think maybe they're becoming the same party.
      FWIW, the Belgian (both the Flemish and the Walloon) socialists have been against this proposal and the fast-tracking from the start, so I think you're generalising a bit too much.
      --
      Donate free food here
  101. Re:Not surprised hw companies don't like sw patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the crap are you on about? Software is a huge part of IBM's business, and I'm pretty sure Nokia also have a reasonable number of developers, who most likely do the same thing I've done: Come up with a great idea, and say "Thank god I don't have to worry about patenting that, I don't need $100,000 and a team of rabid lawyers, plus a desire to play crazy-person legal poker, I can just write the code and move on with my life". Honestly, patents are a tool for huge companies with huge budgets to bludgeon the crap out of smaller ones, and the less can be patented, the better.

  102. Compound nouns by tez_h · · Score: 2, Informative

    Recent current events might have introduced you to commanders-in-chief, chiefs of staff, prisoners or war, and presidents-elect.

    You may be driving around, past a series of culs-de-sac, looking on at the passersby. You might be on your way to visiting sons-, brothers-, or even mothers-in-law.

    Then, in the evening, you munch on a couple of crepes suzette, chased down by a few gins and tonic. Finally, you turn on the TV to catch a pastiche starring all living Doctors Who.

    -Tez

    --
    Haskell, the static-typed, lazy, polymorphic, programming language.
  103. Re: Holy crap! by Ed+Drone · · Score: 1

    Having a name common in India may not help you with the no-nothings in America. Heard a news report t'other day about a bunch of yahoos that beat up this "Arab" or "Muslim" who turned out to be a Hindu. Given that Hindu/Muslim antagonism was the root cause of the split of Pakistan off from India*, if you know anything about the folks involved, you'd know that a Hindu isn't a Muslim, and would be much less likely to be an anti-American terrorist. Anti-Pak terrorist, maybe, but these were American thugs. Ed

  104. MOD PARENT UP!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was on topic and funny.

  105. Remind me how Peng is worth my buck$... by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

    I'm not trying to troll... I just want to make sure he did something worthy.

    Jesse Jordan wrote a search engine, registered a cool domain name, then used the site to clearly document his fight. To top it all off, he cut off donations when he made back the $12k, and implores us to send our donations to...

    The other guy, Daniel Peng. His website is just a single page -- tiny by comparison. But he comes highly recommended, by Slashdot and the afore-mentioned Jordan.

    Other than that, can y'all remind me why I should support Peng?

    By the way, I'd ask Paypal folks to please contribute more than a buck. Paypal fees (30c + 2.9%) will turn your $1 contribution into a 67c contribution, but he'll get about $4.55 if you give $5.

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
  106. Mod Abuse by Danta · · Score: 1

    Whoever modded above comment off-topic should screw his brain back in before he mods next time.

    It is funny, on-topic and a right-on-the-spot comment.