Slashdot Mirror
IBM Granted "Paper-or-Plastic?" Patent
theodp writes "On Tuesday, IBM was granted US Patent No. 7,407,089 for storing a preference for paper or plastic grocery bags on customer cards and displaying a picture of said preference after a card is scanned. The invention, Big Blue explains, eliminates the 'unnecessary inconvenience for both the customer and the cashier' that results when 'Paper or Plastic?' must be asked. The patent claims also cover affixing a cute sticker of a paper or plastic bag to a customer card to indicate packaging preferences. So does this pass the 'significant technical content' test, IBM'ers?"
We have no bags at the supermarkets anymore, unless you buy them. So almost everybody has bags or boxes that will last much longer.
Environment and such, ya know. Other countries do the same, I believe.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Databases have been known for a few years now. Customer identification cards as well. So now you can patent specific pieces of information when tied to the identification?
Maybe I'm stupid but it seems to me that the system might be in need revision. Perhaps IBM was trying to make a point?
For all the anti plastic bag talk, I've never really heard any reasons WHY they are so bad. The common one you get from people is either they get into the water and damager wild life, or they don't bio-degrade.
If its damage, then if you take care to dispose, how is it an issue?
If its bio-degrade, I dont get that either. They arent the largest things around. Is it a significant issue? Things barely degrade in landfills anyhow, they are anaerobic.
Maybe these days its oil based.. which maybe somehow slightly valid.. but its nothing compared to petrol. Also, anti-plastic has been around so long it cant be that. So maybe someone can inform me!
While there is probably a good answer(s) ill have shot back at me, I'm still going to be annoyed that its not well conveyed onto consumers WHY this is bad. I feel too much like I'm in 1984 if I just have to know things are bad because everyone says so. Feels like its some minor issue that gets so much press yet if everyone stopped using them it wouldn't help anything at all.. producing huge amounts of paper bags would be a nightmare and is everyone using reusable going to save us all? Most people seem to slack off once they feel they are "doing their bit" by not using plastic bags.. even if they don't know anything about the issues involved.
There's a difference? In the UK we just insert the card and type our PIN. Before that we handed over our card, signed the receipt and watched as the cashier didn't compare signatures. No-one seems to care between credit and debit because Visa do both and don't make too much differentiation.
Maybe stuff like this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage_Patch
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
IBM have been patenting really really stupidly simple and obvious inventions for quite a while now. It seems that every month /. reports on an IBMer being granted a patent on something like stickers on credit cards, or on/off switches, or a great new way of peeling an orange.
Here's what I think: you've got IBM, a very wealthy company with a very strong brand and a good reputation, and a lot of clever people. Why not solicit crazy-but-patentable ideas from IBMers, drop the small (to IBM) amount of cash on patenting it, and then have a portfolio of crazy stuff. Then when you run into problems with other patents you can pull out a patent on putting a sticker on a bank card and say "Well, you let that through..."
I reckon they're gearing up to give the US patent system an almighty rattling.
If its damage, then if you take care to dispose, how is it an issue?
Because of their size & weight, plastic bags escape normal disposal options easily. Look around you. Most of the trash I see on the streets is plastic bags.
You probably use thousands of plastic bags every year. Are you so confident of your disposal methods that none of them entered a waterway?
if its bio-degrade, I dont get that either. They arent the largest things around. Is it a significant issue?
1) Paper bags recycle more readily than plastic.
2) You could just reuse a sturdy bag and that way, not contribute to landfill with the containers you use to take home your shopping at all.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Can the IBM system store such a complex decision process?
All this money that is being spent pursuing retarded patents like this is classified as R&D spending. It is seen as successful R&D spending because it produces patents (a handy metric for innovation) and money. The question of quality, of whether it actually corresponds to real technological advance, seems to be irrelevant to most people in industry and high office.
The US, seeing itself as a high tech economy, is measuring inputs (R&D money) and gross outputs (patents and the money they produce) and patting itself on the back for the resulting 'growth' (innovation), despite the fact you are producing little or none.
Being completely unaware of the true state of your economy is a dangerous place to be.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
I'd like a card that says;
"I do not have a customer 'loyalty' card. No, I do not want a customer 'loyalty' card."
Would save me hours of wasted time in the average year. Can I patent this idea?
Here in Sweden, you pick the type of bag yourself and place it on the conveyor belt along with the groceries. (Assuming of course that you didn't bring your own bags or other suitable container with you.)
And then you pack yourself the groceries into the bags.
A plastic bag costs in the ballpark of 25c (US) and a paper bag about 50c (US).
while true; do eject; eject -t; done
My visa debit card clearly says Visa debit on it and people still ask me if it's a debit or credit card. This normally only happens in places that charge 2.5% for using a credit card though.
Is that, by associating you with your bag selection, the store can actually better know in advance how many bags it needs to buy. If you did bring your bags, the store would know it, and could then send you stuff to thank you for your environmental savvy, and then based on data mining, show you some of the promotional items you might be interested.
We all laugh at the IBM Patent, but they are going to make a ton of money off of it.
This is my sig.
The truth is you can save 3% by keeping tires properly inflated and drilling in the arctic reserve will add 1% to our oil in 20 years.
You're playing a little fast and loose with your percentages there. You may well be able to save 3% of your gasoline by keeping your tires properly inflated, and drilling the arctic may add 1% to the crude oil supply. However, gasoline and crude oil are two different beasts. You have to account for how much of a given barrel of crude oil winds up in your gas tank, and how much gets used (and/or wasted) elsewhere.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
What? huh? Who cares how much oil you are "adding to the market" if you are not using it! That's like saying, "Hey, everybody! We could add more food to the market if we add just stop eating! Hooray!" Please do not mistake me, I am not against conservation. Clearly in my last analogy, there are some people (not everybody) who could go with less food. They would have more personal wealth and there would be more food available for others, but this will not keep feeding people indefinitely. The world's population today could not have lived on the food supply of ages past, even if everybody was on strict rations.
I think you're suggesting that if you save a gallon of gas or a loaf of bread a week, that next week you'll have to make it up by consuming an extra to make up your personal deficit. And that would be true if you'd saved the gallon of gas my not making a trip this week that you have to make up for the next. But if you can reduce your car's "appetite" for fuel, so that it simply requires less fuel to do the same work, then you don't have that personal fuel deficit to make up. You left a gallon of fuel at the station, effectively "adding it to the market".
I'll agree that that's no reason not to pursue long term remedies at the same time. Conservation now can give us a little breathing room, especially if it's something as painless as checking the tires.
I am not a crackpot.