Slashdot Mirror


USPTO Awards LOL Patent To IBM

theodp writes "Among the last batch of patents granted in 2009 was one for IBM's Resolution of Abbreviated Text in an Electronic Communications System. The invention of four IBMers addresses the hitherto unsolvable problem of translating abbreviations to their full meaning — e.g., 'IMHO' means 'In My Humble Opinion' — and vice versa. From the patent: 'One particularly useful application of the invention is to interpret the meaning of shorthand terms ... For example, one database may define the shorthand term "LOL" to mean "laughing out loud."' USPTO records indicate the patent filing was made more than a year after Big Blue called on the industry to stop what it called 'bad behavior' by companies who seek patents for unoriginal work. Yet another example of what USPTO Chief David Kappos called IBM's apparent schizophrenia on patent policy back when he managed Big Blue's IP portfolio."

274 comments

  1. UYK by presidenteloco · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hint: It's Scottish!

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:UYK by mandelbr0t · · Score: 3, Funny

      Up Yer Kilt?

      --
      "Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
    2. Re:UYK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about FU?

    3. Re:UYK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our military no longer can talk in acronyms. Robin Williams will have to retract his bit in Good Morning Vietnam.

    4. Re:UYK by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Fully Understood?

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    5. Re:UYK by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      That's why they've been using reverse acrnonyms this whole time, now they can call their directed energy weapon a "phaser" and their powered exoskeleton a "hulk", and they don't have to justify it!

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    6. Re:UYK by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Fun University?

  2. lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by selven · · Score: 5, Funny

    "lol" hasn't meant anything close to "laughing out loud" for years. It's more like "your statement is slightly humorous, but I'm definitely not laughing".

    1. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Tr3vin · · Score: 5, Funny

      lol

    2. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      lqtm

    3. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by mqduck · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, "lol" is now an anti-abbreviation for a period. For example:
      "today i went to the store and got some orange juice lol"

      --
      Property is theft.
    4. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Romancer · · Score: 1

      From the filed doc:

      One particularly useful application of the invention is to interpret the meaning of shorthand terms. In one embodiment, a group of databases may be provided that each define one or more shorthand terms. These definitions may be structured in the database as shorthand terms paired with longhand terms. For example, one database may define the shorthand term "LOL" to mean "laughing out loud." Another database may instead define "LOL" to mean "lots of laughs." A database may also include multiple definitions for a given term. For example, a user's personal database may have two entries for the shorthand term "OMW" including "on my way" and "oh my word"

      --


      ) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
      ) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
    5. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Brentyl · · Score: 5, Funny

      This patent would have helped a co-worker of mine's uncle: He thought LOL meant "Lots of Love."

      Pretty harmless, until he started using it inappropriately: "I'm so sorry to hear of your loss. LOL" or "You're better off without him anyway. LOL".

      Apparently, they had to hold an intervention. :)

    6. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by lattyware · · Score: 1

      YSISHBIDNL

      --
      -- Lattyware (www.lattyware.co.uk)
    7. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya and WTF mean "Why The Face?" so I'm not sure why it's in your title.

    8. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you texting with blond hot girls, aren't you?

    9. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by selven · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      What's a girl and why is their temperature relevant?

    10. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I blame grade inflation. Nowadays, "OMGWTFROTFLOL" means a faint smile.

    11. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Hmmm2000 · · Score: 1

      This made me laugh a little :)

    12. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by selven · · Score: 2, Funny

      Needs more BBQ IMO.

    13. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Paaskonijn · · Score: 1

      lal?

    14. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by __aasqbs9791 · · Score: 1

      It made me LOL. The typical kind.

    15. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      More interesting is his choice of words and their order. Why 'blond hot girls' rather than the more natural 'hot blond girls'? He places stress on the fact that they are 'blond' rather than hot. Which is an unusual choice to be sure, as if stating that the colour of the hair is intrinsically valuable.

      Perhaps more suspect is the use of blond rather than blonde. Blond being reserved for males, blonde for females. So his most stressed point was to mention a blond male, 'hot' and 'girl' being merely secondary thoughts.

    16. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by crispin_bollocks · · Score: 1

      they're doing it for the lulz

    17. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You lying sack of shit, your "co-workers uncle" did not say that to anyone.

      You made that up.

      LOL (lots of love),

      Mom

    18. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      LULs

    19. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by jsiren · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From the filed doc:

      ...a group of databases may be provided that each define one or more shorthand terms. These definitions may be structured in the database as shorthand terms paired with longhand terms. For example, one database may define the shorthand term "LOL" to mean "laughing out loud." Another database may instead define "LOL" to mean "lots of laughs." A database may also include multiple definitions for a given term. For example, a user's personal database may have two entries for the shorthand term "OMW" including "on my way" and "oh my word"

      IOW, they have managed to patent a dictionary? Prior art, anyone?

      --
      Usage: km/h for speed (kilometers per hour); kph for very slow impulses (kilopond hours).
    20. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what he thought ROTFL meant?

    21. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      But this one involves computers and stuff! It's so obviously different!

      --
      $ make available
    22. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      I thought blond meant hair color and blonde meant stupidity.

      --
      $ make available
    23. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people interpret LOL today as Laughing OnLine.

    24. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that would be YSISHBIDNL. LOL means Laughing Out Loud.

    25. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by NumbDr9 · · Score: 1

      My coworker's wife initially thought wtf was "Wow, that's funny." He set her straight . . . after a while ;)

    26. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      If you're not careful with the BBQ, you'll be ROTFBYOF.
      ...
      (Because You're On Fire)

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    27. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duh. Really ought to feel loved.

    28. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Courageous · · Score: 1

      rofl

    29. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your System IV Sure Has Been Influential, Discover Netherlander's Linux!

    30. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Tynin · · Score: 2, Funny

      tl;dr

    31. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by squidinkcalligraphy · · Score: 1

      imho, lol looks like someone sticking their hands up. "So the police yell 'Stick em up', so I'm, like, lol"

      --
      "I think it would be a good idea" Gandhi, on Western Civilisation
    32. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Tynin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Damn google is quick to index. I went to search the interwebs to find out what YSISHBIDNL means, and I got 2 hits, both of them you.

    33. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by flimflammer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would almost consider this +5 Insightful over +5 Funny due to how true this is.

    34. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Tynin · · Score: 1

      Yet Some Intellectually Small Humans Believe In Deceit, Not Learning.

    35. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by dookiesan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Your Story Is Somewhat Humorous But I Did Not Laugh?

    36. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Gudeldar · · Score: 1

      IRDLOL (I really did laugh out loud)

    37. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Chysn · · Score: 1

      "Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure LOL We are met on a great battle-field of that war LOL We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live LOL It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this ROTFLMFAO"

      --
      --I'm so big, my sig has its own sig.
      -- See?
    38. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      The "lots of love" is what someone told me too, when I was first starting out online.

      Luckily, I didn't trust his expertise. Before I started using it, I checked for myself. :P

    39. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Tynin · · Score: 1

      Nice catch, I think you might have nailed it.

    40. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You know this still throws me. I've learned over the years that it's the same as a smiley but for people half my age. However whenever I see it I automatically get a negative opinion of the writer. It just gets overused. For instance, in a chat room someone says "had to reboot my computer lol" I wonder if they're simple in the head somehow to cause them to laugh out loud when their computer crashed? It's a strange place to even put a smiley, and yet I see stuff like that all the time. I see people who can't end a sentence without a lol on the end. As soon as I lighten up a bit on it, someone uses it badly and I just start hating the lollers all over again.

    41. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by rjamestaylor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On a development project we banned LOL and insisted on the more accurate LIMH - laughing in my head. No one LOLs online.

      --
      -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
    42. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Plaid+Phantom · · Score: 1

      ha

      --
      All comments are properties and trademarks of the voices in my head. Not like I'm gonna claim them.
    43. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Worse, they patented a *BSD classic application's function.

      Check http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/games/wtf/

      Yes, it is really the "wtf" command. They really need some heads up from BSD guys.

    44. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by jc42 · · Score: 2, Funny

      And in IBM's internal corporate database, LOL expands to "Lots of Lawyers".

      OA (Ob Abbreviation): IANAL.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    45. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by indi0144 · · Score: 1

      zomg IBM is trying to take over 4chan!!!!1ionelol

    46. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      I wonder if this patent application wasn't meant anything else than being the ultimate ironic attack on USPTO.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    47. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it not Loyal Orange Lodge?

    48. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      It also seems to be used as punctuation by some people - putting "lol" where a full stop usually may be found...

    49. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, perhaps better yet, TOL - thinking of laughing.

    50. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it meant Look Out Loser, which makes it even worse.

    51. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Spacezilla · · Score: 1

      Fixing bad moderation.

    52. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one LOLs online.

      I do.

    53. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, it's 11 better than AOL.

    54. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      I think you mean "where a full stop usually may be found lololol"

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    55. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by bensode · · Score: 1

      Wow reminds me of an old IRC game I used to play back in the day ...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrophobia_(game)

      --
      "Keep at least 3-6 full bottles of hard alcohol on hand, a 2 week resignation notice,..." - Poetmatt
    56. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would consider it +5 Sad due to how true it is.

    57. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      For the longest time I thought lol was just supposed to look like a stick guy cheering.

    58. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Wanna bet? ^That's also my Skype username.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    59. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PROTIP: reading the GP might help. When they said "your statement is slightly humorous, but I'm definitely not laughing" could be a clue.

    60. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You banned laughing out loud and can only laugh in your head? I'm glad I don't work at your company!

    61. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by eihab · · Score: 1

      imho, lol looks like someone sticking their hands up. "So the police yell 'Stick em up', so I'm, like, lol"

      Great, thanks for ruining "lol" for me forever! I can't see the letters anymore :\

      --
      If you can't mod them join them.
    62. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by wgc · · Score: 1

      Same with my Mother-in-law, but then I looked it up ... apparently back when they used these sheets of compressed dried wood pulp and printed with handheld sticks containing ink or carbon black, LOL did indeed mean "Lots of Love". Just ask wikipedia.

    63. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      /golfclap

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    64. Re:lol = laughing out loud? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I initially though WTF mean "Want to Fuck?" Yeah. I'm just glad I didn't vocalize that before I learned better.

  3. Whatis bot by wmaker · · Score: 3, Interesting

    as an IBM employee I use the "Whatis bot" all the time. It is just a chat bot on Sametime chat inside Lotus Notes that allows you to message it an abbreviation and it tells you all the meanings. This is very useful when you get an e-mail from a long time IBMer that knows every abbreviation and doesn't hesitate to use them.

    1. Re:Whatis bot by wmaker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      here's an example: William H. Maker: lol 5:38:00 PM Whatis Bot *Fu...: Found 9 results. (Buzz) Definitions Found (1) Laugh Out Loud (4) Limitation Of Liability (3) Loss Of Light (2) Laugh Out Loud (1) Laughing Out Loud (1) Lead Overlay Layer (1) List Of Lists (1) Log Of Log (1) Lots Of Laughs ... brought to you by Acrobot. http://acrobot.almaden.ibm.com/

    2. Re:Whatis bot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      that looks like the most useless tool i've ever seen. how is it treating "(1) Laugh Out Loud" and "(2) Laugh Out Loud" as different entries? is it not cleaning whitespace correctly?

      i've dealt with a lot of IBM crap in the past, and it's all lazily and incorrectly implemented as demonstrated here.

      CRAP.

    3. Re:Whatis bot by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This makes sense given IBM's propensity for naming all their products things like WCTME (Workplace Client Technology, Micro Edition).

      See? I bet you thought the W was for WebSphere! (I know I did, until I checked it before posting.)

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    4. Re:Whatis bot by bongey · · Score: 1

      So it would translate
      Lotus Notes: A email client that gives the overwhelming urge to kill yourself, similar to outlook.

    5. Re:Whatis bot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah, if only.

      Lotus Notes is a horribly inflexible database tool which is mostly used for its embedded, bloated implementation of an approximation of an email client.... but it still gives you an overwhelming urge to kill yourself.

    6. Re:Whatis bot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aarrrrggggh! WTF! Sametime is not something in Notes! Notes is something that can accommodate Sametime as a hosted app. And I doubt that whatis has been updated in the past 10 years.

    7. Re:Whatis bot by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      So, it's a suicide booth v0.001 alpha?

    8. Re:Whatis bot by NobodyExpects · · Score: 1

      as an IBM employee I use the "Whatis bot" all the time. It is just a chat bot on Sametime chat inside Lotus Notes that allows you to message it an abbreviation and it tells you all the meanings. This is very useful when you get an e-mail from a long time IBMer that knows every abbreviation and doesn't hesitate to use them.

      As a long time customer of IBM, I'd love to have access to that tool. After all, I after reading my invoices, I always thought IBM stood for It'll Be More! I'd rolf, but then would I owe IBM more money?

    9. Re:Whatis bot by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

      Well that's cleared that up then.

  4. OMG by Airdorn · · Score: 0

    OMFG! (tm)

    1. Re:OMG by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      That trademark is already held by the Ontario Mega Finance Group:

      http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts-apparel/unisex/generic/810c/

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
  5. The most trivial patent awarded so far? by Phrogman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does this win some sort of stupidity award for the most ridiculous patenting of something that shouldn't be patentable? Whats next, patenting the use of punctuation in sentances?

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    1. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by selven · · Score: 1

      For many people, "lol" is punctuation. As in "I went to the store and bought some chicken lol"

    2. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You need to know a few important things about IBM and patents (I work there):

      1) Employees are given a bonus for submitting patents. So any idea you have, if you can get it past the IBM review board, makes you money. Expect stupid ideas to get through every once in a while.

      2) IBM likes to brag about the size of its patent portfolio and they make a lot of money licensing it. A bigger number (2500+ per year) sounds impressive and few people will actually look to see how many are really any good.

      3) They usually won't enforce a stupid patent like this, but they'll use it against anyone that sues them as a defensive weapon. (See the SCO case, although IBM dropped its counterclaims when they realized how ridiculous & weak SCOs position was)

    3. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Whats next, patenting the use of punctuation in sentances?

      I suspect it will be patenting grammer...

    4. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whats next, patenting the use of punctuation in sentances?

      So all of these punctuation-less posts by CircleTimesSquare were just a way for him to prepare for the inevitable?

    5. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      Whats next, patenting the use of punctuation in sentances?

      There's not nearly as much potential infringement for punctuation, as say, common misspellings.

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    6. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      Whats next, patenting the use of punctuation in sentances?

      At least /. posters will be safe.

    7. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by ps2os2 · · Score: 0

      IBM has done this sort of thing for years. A few years ago I challenged an IBMer on the issue. The patent (if I recall correctly) was how to handle lines of people (queuing).

      IBM seems to have an internal policy of brownie points for the number of patents an employee gets. I do not know if it gets them more research or what exactly as I haven't asked.

      IBM also withdraws a lot of patents when it becomes obvious that the patent is less than lets say patentable.

    8. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Whats next, patenting the use of punctuation in sentances?

      Dont ask its better in your court case if theres no evidence of looking into the existence of a patent and especially dont look at the patent Just trust me on this one you dont want to find yourself in my shoes your life will really be ruined

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    9. Re:The most trivial patent awarded so far? by Samah · · Score: 1

      Whats next, patenting the use of punctuation in sentances?

      I suspect it will be patenting grammer...

      More likely spelling, as in "sentences" and "grammar" lol
      Oops, replace "lol" with "."
      Damn these new punctuation conventions...

      --
      Homonyms are fun!
      You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
  6. IMHO?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IMHO, IMHO means "In My Honest Opinion"

    1. Re:IMHO?? by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      I thot it was "humble", not "honest". Use "frankly" if you want it to mean "honest".

    2. Re:IMHO?? by Seth+Kriticos · · Score: 1

      No, it means: I my humble opinion.

      Get an IBM patented thesaurus, you douche!

    3. Re:IMHO?? by Seth+Kriticos · · Score: 1

      And my friggin' keyboard ate that missing 'n'.

      I probably need an IBM patented dictionary adjustment program for posting this carp.

    4. Re:IMHO?? by madddddddddd · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      why wouldn't i use "honest" if i wanted it to mean "honest" frankly, you're an idiot. can i not be frank and dishonest at the same time? i guess you'll have to decide if you want to honestly be an idiot or not.

    5. Re:IMHO?? by madddddddddd · · Score: 0

      honest means honest frankly means frankly

    6. Re:IMHO?? by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      Its also ghetto for IMaHO

    7. Re:IMHO?? by Velodra · · Score: 1

      So you should say IMFO? Some people might misinterpret that as another common word that starts with F.

    8. Re:IMHO?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A(m-1)d my friggi(m-1)' keyboard ate that missi(m-1)g '(m-1)'.

      I probably (m-1)eed a(m-1) IBM pate(m-1)ted dictio(m-1)ary adjustme(m-1)t program for posting this carp.

      FTFY.

  7. LOL by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    There, I said it.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  8. Interesting technchology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF STFU RTFA LOLZ

  9. I.B.M. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Incredible Bowel Movements

    1. Re:I.B.M. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In Business for Money

    2. Re:I.B.M. by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      Im a Big Mook I Build Mustaches

    3. Re:I.B.M. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Been Mangled...

    4. Re:I.B.M. by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

      "Inconceivably Big Mind"

      as in "If it weren't for my Inconceivably Big Mind I wouldn't have been
      able to think up expanding the acronyms using a lookup table!"

      --

      Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    5. Re:I.B.M. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bastards!

    6. Re:I.B.M. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incontinentia Buttocks Machines.

  10. wtf is ibm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    omg cbit.wtf?watp?they r jk?lmfao&rofl

  11. This made me giggle by Setral · · Score: 1

    November 2006 Fux et al

  12. New rule! by headkase · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If a patent application is found to be completely stupid one of your other patents is invalidated by random draw! *wishes*

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:New rule! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...with exponential penalties for repeat offenders.

      The first "silly" patent revokes one of your other patents.
      The second revokes two; then four; then eight.

    2. Re:New rule! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read ".. one of your parents is invalidated by random draw".

      Thought that sounded a bit harsh for a comment modded Interesting..

    3. Re:New rule! by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      Well, there wouldn't be much point in exponential penalties for multiple cases, would there?

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  13. Prior Spam Art by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    I've seen many websites that robotically turn ad-targetable words into hyperlinks and/or roll-overs.

    1. Re:Prior Spam Art by geekoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      First off, I'm glad someone understands what's going on and that they are not actually patenting LOL.

      Second, read the patent; while you are correct, the patent talks about getting the means based on specific context; which is hard to do.

      It's nt even about the definition, hell you could create your own definition, big deal. Determining context of a conversation automatically and then know what a abbreviation or Jargon means within that context is awesome.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Prior Spam Art by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How would this be any different than any other kind of grammar/context translation? I mean, fuck, but IBM probably had patents on that sort of thing forty years ago. It looks to me like a back door way of repatenting what's probably expired already.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:Prior Spam Art by headkase · · Score: 1

      Um, won't the semantic web just kinda do this?!

      --
      Shh.
    4. Re:Prior Spam Art by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      Licklorred>

    5. Re:Prior Spam Art by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Figuring out which interpretation is meant using the context of a word seems to be a separate technical concern from highlighting a word to make it a pop-up/rollover. Was it merely an example usage, or are they patenting the actual joining of the two?

    6. Re:Prior Spam Art by belmolis · · Score: 1

      A system for determining the meaning of acronyms in context might indeed be sufficiently original and non-obvious to be patentable. However, this patent claims only the idea of doing so, not any particular method. A patent must be sufficiently detailed as to allow one skilled in the art to implement it. Since it does not provide this level of detail, I conclude that the patent is invalid.

    7. Re:Prior Spam Art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The specification must provide sufficient detail to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the claimed invention. All that detail doesn't need to be embedded in the claim itself, particularly as the patentee is their own lexicographer. I see no enablement issue here ... the spec is pretty clear on how to make this work. Did they perhaps claim the invention too broadly? Maybe a little, but I don't think this is some gross disregard for the state of the art like Slashdot would have you believe it is.

    8. Re:Prior Spam Art by belmolis · · Score: 1

      If they aren't claiming the particular method of using context, which as we agree, they can't be, then the claim amounts to the mere idea of using context. The originality and non-obviousness of that is quite dubious. There are plenty of programs that interpret words and phrases based on context, and Chinese character entry systems that make guesses based on context. Using such techniques to expand acronyms does not seem like much of an innovation to me.

  14. WTF Indeed by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They've patented a dictionary? That's what it looks like to me.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  15. how is this not original? by geekoid · · Score: 1

    while dumbing the concept down to lol to make it seem abd, lets think about it in a practicla manner.

    A system that auomatically knows what a abbreviation means withine the given context would be pretty clever.

    I ahe read documents ful of initals, sometime the SAME initials just different context.

    LOL, 555, mdr. all those mean the same thing.

    Also LOL is a place in france, LOL is short for Lack Of Love LOL is also short for memory.

    ASa side note, my kids actually say LOL sometime with pronounciation of each letter, sometime as 'Lawl'. The are 9 and 11. So expect everyone around you to be saying it soon.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:how is this not original? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Also LOL is a place in france...

      Thanks, dude, now you got that dirty limerick stuck in my head. BIH.
         

    2. Re:how is this not original? by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      Next step: SLOL (saying LOL out loud)

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    3. Re:how is this not original? by dangitman · · Score: 2, Funny

      ASa side note, my kids actually say LOL sometime with pronounciation of each letter, sometime as 'Lawl'. The are 9 and 11.

      Not surprising, considering how illiterate their father is.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  16. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh shit!

  17. LOLLERSKATES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM patented stupidity.

    1. Re:LOLLERSKATES! by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Apple invents it, Microsoft clones it, and IBM patents it.

    2. Re:LOLLERSKATES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple invents it, Microsoft clones it, and IBM patents it.

      Researchers invent it, Apple shines it, Microsoft clones it, IBM patents it.

    3. Re:LOLLERSKATES! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually the way it goes is:

      1. Some obscure one-man start-up invents it, unsuccessfully tries to productize it (bad marketing, rough edges etc), fails, and is bought up by bigger fish.

      2. A number of companies sell it for a few years, with so-so results.

      3. Apple "borrows" the idea and creates a product which is exactly the same, except that its name starts with "i", it is white, and it replaces all buttons with a single "just do it" one in the shape of an Apple logo. Several million are sold in the first year of sales. The name of the Apple device instantly becomes a genericized word for this whole class of devices.

      4. The same companies that were selling such devices before "re-invent" them, cloning Apple new design (not very successfully; for some reason, no-one else can quite make it work with a single button) and leaving everything else intact. These are advertised as "i$Whatever killers". Sales go up a little bit, but Apple still pwns everyone.

      5. Apple releases a new version - it's exactly the same as old one, only colored black, and costs $50 more. Several million more are sold in the first year of sales.

      6. After several years, Microsoft wakes up to see the new market, and promptly announces the development its own product. It will run WinCE, be programmable via XNA, and require a PC with Vista or higher. Available colors are brown and puke green. Sales... wait, there are sales?

      7. After one more year, IBM announces that it had the patent for the fundamental idea of the device all along, and OMGPROFITs.

    4. Re:LOLLERSKATES! by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Indeed, although note that it's only with the Ipod that Apple made a dominant product, with the word becoming a generic term for that market.

      With everything else - computers, phones - their product remained a niche, and other companies don't give a damn about trying to copy them. Yet still, despite them not being the inventors, or the first companies to do it, you have Apple fans and the media claiming that Apple "invented" or "popularised" it...

    5. Re:LOLLERSKATES! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      With everything else - computers, phones - their product remained a niche, and other companies don't give a damn about trying to copy them.

      I'm very far from being an Apple fanboi, and I don't like iPhone, but I can't help but notice that its design very strongly affected that of the smartphones that came after it: HTC Touch, all Android phones, Palm Pre, N900 all bear those marks.

    6. Re:LOLLERSKATES! by CyberSaint · · Score: 1

      Ok, I don't mean to get pedantic here, but the general layout hardware wise is almost identical to my old Palm IIIc. Thinner lighter and more seamless perhaps, but that's more a result of technology changes than any design decisions. If you are referring to the software interface I'll give you that they had some influential Ideas, but again it seems somewhat obvious given the technology used. I'm not saying that isn't unique or influential, The FSM only knows how many kludgy interfaces some people can and have come up with for various types hardware, but hardly non-obvious to anyone who is willing to put some effort in to the interface design.

    7. Re:LOLLERSKATES! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that isn't unique or influential, The FSM only knows how many kludgy interfaces some people can and have come up with for various types hardware, but hardly non-obvious to anyone who is willing to put some effort in to the interface design.

      If you want to paraphrase it as "Apple is the only one willing to put good effort into interface design", I'm fine with that. I do not think their designs are truly revolutionary or ground-breaking; just really well executed, particularly for casual user.

  18. laughing out loud. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There, I translated it.

  19. Summary is wrong, read the patent by geekoid · · Score: 1

    /. always words the summary of patents awarded in the stupid and most trollish way possible.

    It's actually a good idea and has nothing to do with patenting LOL.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      The Internet already does this. I see a 3/4 letter acrinum and I look it up.

    2. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Phrogman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but all they have patented is the functionality to look up a given abbreviation and substitute the long form of it. My IDE will let me enter "fore" and have it bring up a list of matching options include "foreach", how is this any different other than its in relationship to communications i.e. "texting" and presumably email? Its exactly the sort of functionality that someone building a message client might think to add - and probably has of course - and as such I think its ridiculous that it could be patentable, or even that anyone would try.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    3. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      3/4 letter?

      So J becomes I
      O becomes D
      B becomes R

      or perhaps you meant something else??? 3 OR 4 work letter???

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    4. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by MooUK · · Score: 1

      Three or four work letter?

    5. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by fuzzylollipop · · Score: 2, Informative

      How about using the Internet to look up "acronym" and learn how to spell. While you are at it, learn that every Abbreviation is not automatically an Acronym, Acronyms form pronounceable words, like LASER and RADAR. IMHO is not an acronym.

    6. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about you stop moaning like a girl and submit your evidence of prior art? Hmm, thought so, you don't actually give a shit from your armchair.

    7. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by lastchance_000 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Tell that to Imhotep.

    8. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by dem0n1 · · Score: 1

      evidence of prior art?

      Macro expansion from text typed in a document? I had a spell checker that did that back in the early '90s.

      --
      Why save your soul when you can sell it for a profit?
    9. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by greensoap · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Does your ide include: "receiving, on a recipient messaging device, a text communication sent from a sender messaging device, wherein the text communication comprises at least one shorthand term;"? This the first limitation of the first independent claim.

      It might be obvious to add into a messaging device, but the USPTO would need to find a couple of prior art references that contain all the features and then show a reason to combine them. The PTO doesn't get to just say, "it would be obvious to do that, kneener kneener kneeeener"

    10. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      I will patent the process of interpreting miss-spellings and typos.

      Acronym.

    11. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my humble opinion that's extremely patentable?
      I don't quite understand that in the context in which you used it.

    12. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      acrinum? are you retarded?

    13. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by wickedskaman · · Score: 0

      You're mean! :'-(

      --
      Sand's overrated... it's just tiny little rocks.
    14. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by grcumb · · Score: 3, Funny

      Tell that to Imhotep.

      WHATISBOT: In My Humble Opinion Too Easily Patented.
      WHATISBOT: PRESS ENTER FOR MORE OPTIONS.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    15. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Yes, I have had many applications that did this through the years. The most recent is just about every application that my current client has. The mainframe that is the authority on employment status sends an "A", "T", "I" for Active, Terminated, or Inactive. All of the applications that recieve a message about the individual, which include that one one letter acronym, translate it to the full word for end users. The same is done for department and division names.

      This functionality goes back at least a decade in the current applications. No doubt this was WAY more popular when memory was more expensive, so storing acronyms and doing a lookup of the full text on display saved huge amounts of money.

    16. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I already have prior art to this from at least 9 years ago. Used to do it with mIRC script in irc channels where people insisted on using abbreviations.

      In fact:

      on ^*:text:*:#:{
          echo $color(text) -trn $target $replace($1-,lol,laugh out loud,imho,in my humble opinion)
          haltdef
      }

      Come and get me IBM.

    17. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Does your ide include: "receiving, on a recipient messaging device, a text communication sent from a sender messaging device, wherein the text communication comprises at least one shorthand term;"?

      The telegraph did this a hundred years ago. Semaphore telegraphs did it two hundred years ago. The fact that the translation of the codes is now being done by a computer program instead of a person or a mechanical device is not a novel matter.

    18. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok, so he can not spell acronym, but he got the word right. Your letter subsitution is an anagram, not an acronym.

    19. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by nabsltd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It might be obvious to add into a messaging device, but the USPTO would need to find a couple of prior art references that contain all the features and then show a reason to combine them. The PTO doesn't get to just say, "it would be obvious to do that, kneener kneener kneeeener"

      Actually, the Patent Office can do that, but they don't. This is what leads to incredibly broad patents.

      Originally, a patent was designed to cover a specific method for achieving a result. Today, we have IBM essentially patenting "using a database to automatically look up words in messages received on a computer". Don't think so? The text speaks for itself:

      receiving, on a recipient messaging device, a text communication sent from a sender messaging device

      My e-mail client is a "recipient messaging device", and your e-mail client is a "sender messaging device". The text of the patent specifically mentions e-mail. So, pretty much any system that defines "shorthand terms" in an e-mail, text message, HTML page, or any other form of electronic communcation would likely infringe on this patent.

      For example, Google or wiktionary.org probably infringe, as you can enter a "text message" like "IMHO" into their search box and have the same result as the IBM patent. And, since neither Google nor anyone else was doing this before 2006 (when the patent was filed), <sarcasm>IBM obviously thought of it first</sarcasm>.

      I think IBM should use their tool to look up "BS".

    20. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my humble opinion that's extremely patentable?
      I don't quite understand that in the context in which you used it.

      Imhotep

    21. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by cvtan · · Score: 1

      OK. Then what is it?

      --
      Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
    22. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      YMTJ. YHFH. HAND.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    23. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by Wavebreak · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but you're wrong. An acronym is an abbreviation (you got that part right) formed by taking the initial letter of each word in the phrase. You can do something like add an extra letter to make an acronym pronounceable, but that isn't part of the definition.

      --
      Nobody expects the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.
    24. Re:Summary is wrong, read the patent by BenoitRen · · Score: 1

      I thought the same thing, until I looked it up. It's as the grandparent says, actually. But then you have dictionaries define words differently, so it it's on a case-by-case basis in practice.

  20. Did IBM just patent every geek's head? by syousef · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I do those translations in my head. My memory is the database. Does that mean I owe IBM royalties?

    I can't believe they just patented the lookup table, albeit in a very specific context.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:Did IBM just patent every geek's head? by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

      My memory is the database.

      Mine too, but more like MS-Access after passing the 1-gig recommended limit.

    2. Re:Did IBM just patent every geek's head? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you're ugly AND slower than hell?!???

      I kid, I kid!!

      Well, about you.

    3. Re:Did IBM just patent every geek's head? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      I do those translations in my head. My memory is the database. Does that mean I owe IBM royalties?

      Yes. And you owe me, services rendered, for answering your question.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:Did IBM just patent every geek's head? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      At least my name is not "Postgre" ;-)

  21. I owe money lol. by Greymoon · · Score: 1

    I do this lol all the time lol. Who will keep track of this? lol Will I lol have to keep track? lol What if I mess up lol three times lol and then get banned lol from the internet? Where do I send the money lol. I will pay to type lol, lol.

  22. the dude abides... by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    TLYO,M

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  23. So... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

    I've been using these terms since 1992 for the most part, can I sue IBM now?

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
    1. Re:So... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Probably. The question is really whether you feel like pissing away your money or not.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:So... by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      Impossible, Al Gore didnt invent the internet for another two years!

  24. YATMV! by dwiget001 · · Score: 1

    Your
    Abbreviation
    Translation
    May
    Vary

  25. Bury the USPTO by pubwvj · · Score: 2

    One more example of why the patent system needs to be eliminated. Let us invalidate _all_ patents, not just one other of theirs.

    1. Re:Bury the USPTO by dangitman · · Score: 1

      One more example of why the patent system needs to be eliminated. Let us invalidate _all_ patents, not just one other of theirs.

      Brilliant logic!

      While we're at it, let's ban all cars because some of them cause accidents because they are faulty. Let's ban all speech, because some people use speech to preach hatred. Let's take laws against murder off the books, because some people have been falsely imprisoned for murder.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    2. Re:Bury the USPTO by gerddie · · Score: 1

      There is no prove that society is better or worse off with or without patent system. Humankind has developed over a very long time without patents, so it is very likely that by abolishing all patents nothing would change. Chances are we are better off, because we don't have to deal with patent trolls any more.

  26. FU! by jo42 · · Score: 1

    Dear IBM,

    FU!

    - The Internet

    1. Re:FU! by russlar · · Score: 1

      Dear IBM,
      FU!
      - The Internet

      PS- DIAF!

      --
      Anybody want my mod points?
  27. Instant Lawsuit, You Can Too! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Just paste this roll-over pop-up implementation into an HTML document to get sued:

    <span title="What the F*ck">WTF</span>

    1. Re:Instant Lawsuit, You Can Too! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      or more like:

      <span title="All Your Ideas Are Belong to Us">IBM</span>

  28. But I likes the short form by fyoder · · Score: 1

    If you click the graphic in the summary, you get a diagram of the translation. It takes a short economical phrase, then expands it into a longer one. What's wrong with economy? Ok, perhaps there's some vocab learning that has to take place first, but I'm still doing that with English perpetually anyway -- I'll run across a word for which I'm uncertain of the meaning and I'll look it up in an online dictionary. It's also safer to leave be, otherwise those poor parishioners at the Lord of Love church are going to have to change it's name to the Laughing Out Loud church. Completely different vibe, though I think personally I would be more inclined to attend the latter.

    --
    Loose lips lose spit.
  29. Please stop using WTF. by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I have been ordered by IBM to stop using WTF and RTFM as that use violates the patent.

    I think that Slashdot should stop using the WTF on their page before IBM sues.

    1. Re:Please stop using WTF. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might be amused to discover that the image says wts, not wtf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_S

  30. Trillain? by SomeWhiteGuy · · Score: 1

    This patent is for the word correction feature that has been in Microsoft Word for years. This isn't original. Complete bunk!

  31. FWIW... by guspasho · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those of you who didn't RTFA, they didn't patent LOL, but the process of using a database to tell you what LOL means, or something along those lines. Not quite as absurd, but still silly.

    However, if you have ever worked for a huge company like Intel, you are swimming in a veritable alphabet soup of unrecognizable acronyms every day. They make an acronym for everything over there. So something like this database would be a godsend in an environment like that.

    1. Re:FWIW... by foospork · · Score: 1

      They patented text substitution and lookup tables?

    2. Re:FWIW... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However, if you have ever worked for a huge company like Intel, you are swimming in a veritable alphabet soup of unrecognizable acronyms every day. They make an acronym for everything over there. So something like this database would be a godsend in an environment like that.

      It's called acronymfinder.com, and it's been there for a long time.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:FWIW... by selven · · Score: 2, Funny

      They patented the use of text substitution and lookup tables on the internet. That makes it new and special.

    4. Re:FWIW... by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Too bad it blows.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    5. Re:FWIW... by schnablebg · · Score: 1

      Where's the fire???

    6. Re:FWIW... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Isn't it already part of the bsd-games package? The command is called "wtf"

      $ which wtf /usr/games/wtf

      $ wtf lol rotfl imho
      LOL: laughing out loud
      ROTFL: rolling on the floor laughing
      IMHO: in my humble opinion

      it also incorporates "man -k" (apropos) functionality:
      $ wtf service
      service: service (8) - run a System V init script

    7. Re:FWIW... by guspasho · · Score: 2, Informative

      That isn't the technology being patented.

      Abstract from the linked patent page: "Electronic messaging systems, a machine-accessible medium, and methods for text-based electronic communication. In one embodiment, a plurality of databases are provided. The databases each define shorthand terms with one or more longhand terms. A shorthand term is targeted within a text message, and the databases are searched for corresponding longhand terms. The longhand terms are selected for display according to factors such as user preferences, the identities of participants to the text communication, and the context of the text message. Abbreviations, shorthand, and other jargon sent by one user is thereby interpreted. For example, one of the longhand terms may be substituted in-line with the text message. Alternatively, all matches for the shorthand term found in the databases may be listed in descending order according to relevancy. "

      That is much more intelligent than just looking up an acronym in Google or at acronymfinder.com. And when combined with the cultural propensity of certain companies like Intel to make up acronyms on the fly that will never appear on a website because their use is limited to a couple of groups within a company, well, now this database seems pretty useful.

      It isn't just a database. It also intercepts your messaging and provides you with the context that some developer in another department doesn't think to provide to you when he uses an acronym that everyone on his team uses but nobody else - anywhere - has ever heard of.

    8. Re:FWIW... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NASA, the king of acronyms, has prior art on this for sure!

    9. Re:FWIW... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      many applications already translate those acronyms on the fly. IBM are patenting something that has existed in many apps for years. Hell even my old chat program I wrote had the option to turn on auto expansion of common acronyms for people that did not understand them.

    10. Re:FWIW... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't just a database. It also intercepts your messaging and provides you with the context that some developer in another department doesn't think to provide to you when he uses an acronym that everyone on his team uses but nobody else - anywhere - has ever heard of.

      So their database has another row to signify context or relevancy. BFD.

    11. Re:FWIW... by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      It's called mescalin. It's the best WTF.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  32. DIAF by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    To explain IBM's patent schizophrenia, the corporate stance may be against silly patents, but they pay their employees handsomely for getting a patent approved. Gaming the system is both lucrative and easy, so we get shit like this.

    --

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

  33. Re:New rule! (and unintended consequences) by qbzzt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With this rule, companies will be motivated to submit as many semi-stupid patents as possible. That way, when the examiner decides that a patent is completely stupid, the other invalidated patent is likely to be a useless one that was created just as patent fodder.

    Or maybe incorporate a bunch of shell corporations, and have each of those corporations apply for a single patent at a time. If it is completely stupid, there is no other patent to strike down. If it is granted, the shell corporation will sell it to the real corporation.

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
  34. ICQ by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    and other IM's used to convert LOL, BRB, etc into faces, little signs or sounds years ago. Isn't that the same thing?

    I'm sure there was some option where the short hand was translated onto the screen to its full meaning.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  35. Re:IMHO by aix+tom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wasn't it " In my Hesitating Opinion"?

    Unless of course the messages deals with the "International Medical Health Organisation"

  36. Done years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In text-to-speech systems. It's a classic problem when you're building software to read text: you have to decide whether to "read" an acronym or "spell" it. For instance "RADAR" is read as a word and "IBM" is spelled out. An excellent example is "St." Is that "Saint" as in "Saint Louis" or "St." as in "Elm Street"?

    You'll find the "St." example in a lot of papers and books on computer speech synthesis. It was a well-known problem in 1999 at Bell Labs, and more-or-less solved. (Obviously, you'll never get every instance right, but we had algorithms that were pretty good.) Look for "Richard Sproat," probably.

  37. Re:New rule! (and unintended consequences) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They already do that to pad their patent portfolio and to give them more ammunition when it comes to patent lawsuits...

  38. icechat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    If that's what it's about, then I can mention that the "old" PC BBS chat door "icechat" had a configurable list of "write this and it's replaced with this", what the author called 'chat macros', which is just a generalized version of what's described here. Heck, I think they could contain ANSI codes so you could get pretty colors too.

    IceChat v4.40 * Sysop-User Chat Utility * *** MAJOR ADDITIONS IN THIS NEW VERSION! *** For RA v2.xx, PB v2.xx, Door.Sys and Dorinfo1.def Compatibles * 10 completely configurable chat modes available, Chat Macros, Emergency Page, User Editor,Definable Chat ANSis, Configurable Strings, VIP Detection, File transfer support,HMB/JAM Support, External DOS Utility Option, Online TextFile Viewing, Auto-Templates & much MORE!! Released: 02/08/97

  39. It's the patent version of World War I by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't blame IBM. They're not "schizophrenic". They are merely in the game playing by the rules as they are written, because that's what everyone else on the field is doing. What if a football team suddenly decided throwing passes was dishonorable, and they wished other people wouldn't do it? They'd get hammered. They'd lose all over the place.

    Same for IBM. They can wish for change and still play a mean game. Nothing wrong with that at all. In fact - the more the merrier, says I. Why? Because the more idiot patents like this that get granted, the sooner this mess will end. For two reasons.

    First reason - the dumber a patent is, and the more obvious it is that you are merely patenting something someone else came up with - the more likely it is that a judge somewhere will get that clue we've all been waiting for.

    Second reason - World War I.

    How did WWI start? The assassination of Franz Ferdinand of Austria. A single death. That's all it took. All of the alliances and counter-alliances of the time made an extremely unstable system. All it took was the right nudge, a single assassination, and all those alliances got called up. Countries picked sides and it was off to war. Where 15 million people died. Imagine that. Fifteen million people all killed, and it all traces to a single assassination.

    Remind you of anything?

    All of these companies today have these IP portfolios, and an uneasy truce in between them that says "you nail us and we'll nail you". Strategic partnerships, licensed IP - a tangled web of legal rights. Just like the tangled web of alliances pre-WWI.

    All it will take is our Ferdinand.

    Remember the hubub over the FAT file system, how MS holds the patent on it? Why aren't they suing everyone for their legally due royalties? They could nail everyone from Samsung to Nokia. So why not do it? Because everyone would nail MS for other trivial things they are in violation of. It would be Patent WW I.

    So let these companies patent trivial crap like LOL. Why not? It will make the crater bigger when The Big One happens. And nobody wants that because in this case it won't be soldiers dying, it will be money evaporating. IP portfolios are insanely overpriced. If PWI happens, the courts will be *swamped*. The only fix will be to invalidate software/process patents or spend every single minute of court time available until 2142 sorting out the mess. And that means those portfolios will suddenly be useless. As will all the license agreements. That's a lot of money to go *poof*. It'll make the housing market bubble of 2008 look like a hiccup. We're talking many many billions of dollars here.

    So let the current cold war continue. Go ahead. Patent LOL. Patent emoticons. Patent tying your right shoe before your left - I don't care.

    Just know that it's going to end, it's going to end soon, and it's going to end badly. And there will be blame enough to go around for everyone. In fact, the end may be beginning right now. We may have had our Ferdinand just recently.

    It's going to be a hell of a ride when this whole mess hits the fan.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      And nobody loses but the little guy, who gets hit with eleventy-three patent suits from every company in the Delaware phone book, and doesn't have any patents to retaliate with.

      The hordes of stupid patents will do nothing if IBM tries using them against Microsoft, or vice versa. They're great for stamping out Joe's New Idea, Inc.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    2. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by RandomUsername99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What you are saying completely makes sense, though judging from my experiences as a former IBMer, I'm willing to bet that their actions are more schizophrenic than one might hope. A lot of people don't realize how little communication there is among IBM's dizzying assortment of departments. The problem is in the way the company is structured.

      Let's start at the top. When it comes to the large company wide decisions, IBM might not only seem to be adaptable, but downright agile compared to other companies that size. It seems to me like the guys who make the big picture decisions are pretty talented.

      They're also so far up the ladder that when it comes to the daily operation of the company, they've got no clue what's going on. They're often more than 5 managers above your average developer.

      Down at the other end of the company, you've got lots of really talented (there are always exceptions that make the rule) developers, technicians and other individual contributors that do the heavy lifting. They're often governed by smart dedicated 1st level managers that really know what's going on.

      The problem is in the middle. It's like you've got the head of a genius, the arms and legs of an Olympian, and the torso of Mr. Creosote from Monty Python's Meaning of Life. (Let's add one more project manager... he's wafer thin!)

      When it comes to the internal processes that IBM uses to conduct business on a day to day basis, they're in the stone age. The layers upon layers of dead-weight middle management seem to have no purpose other than delaying what you're doing so they can say they played a part in it, ensuring that they look good enough in the eyes of the middle manager above them to have a job next quarter. The hordes of inefficient yet needlessly automated processes, completely outdated tools, absurd politics, arbitrary policies and snails pace adaptation of updates and changes to the business processes make it very difficult to actually speak up and make a difference... and given the sheer volume of arbitrary policies that you may be violating at any given time without knowing it, it's not worth speaking up and giving some random middle manager with a grudge leverage to politically manipulate your department. From a practical day to day perspective, you really could view it as a oddly associated bunch of groups, that are bound together by bureaucracy, not dissimilar from the government in Terry Gilliam's movie Brazil.

      For example:
      Most people on Slashdot are probably aware of IBM's commendable commitment to transfer the entire company to Linux. I was very excited to learn that they had their own company endorsed/controlled internal Linux distro with all of the fixin's (Notes, etc) that we could install on our corporate workstations at our discretion. Being an upper level support guy who did a decent amount of scripting for customers who ran our Solaris based product, it was a much more appropriate choice for me than Windows. Everything worked great(or great-ish. I wasn't picky)! Now to install the ticket tracking system... Their idea of "updating" their ticket tracking system was making a screen scraping GUI that sat on top of a specific windows 3270 terminal emulator. I attempted to learn how to use the cryptic CLI/TUI application directly, but I was told by a support policy manager that the GUI program had been extended in ways that weren't supported by the terminal directly. "No problem" i thought "I'm a wine ninja... I can make it happen," no dice. Oh well, I was sure that they'd be coming out with a Linux version soon. After scouring the company intranet for more information, it turns out that there used to be a Linux version but it was permanently cancelled several years earlier because it was too difficult to maintain both branches. So I posted something in the product's board on the intranet asking if there was going to be a renewed interest in it as support was trying to get going with Linux, and the person who responded to the post (given I have no idea on what level they were inv

    3. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by api_syurga · · Score: 1

      Pretty soon.. people may decide to stop doing business with USA...

    4. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Interesting point of view. Another, more accurate point of view, is that anarchists intentionally wanted to start a war, and they succeeded. Funny how anarchists escaped blame for the millions of deaths that followed. Winners write the history books.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Nah. That ain't gonna happen. People won't stop doing business with China, and China is a thousand times worse. Why? Because there's money to be made, and that's a lesson you just haven't learned, apj syurga.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    6. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "LOL"

    7. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice analogy, though WWI was far more complicated than an assasination. Shit was going to go down regardless over Serbia and the same cards would have fallen. It was inevitable, the assasination was not a neccessary catylyst, it just worked out that way. Same here, their house of cards will fall regardless of a breeze, it will just get too ludicrously shaped to stand up.

    8. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

      And that's exactly why I'm rooting for the crash. The system as it is completely stifles innovation. We're going to wind up as a digital third world. Nothing new, no innovation, no nothing as the rest of the world races right past us.

      So let IBM patent all this goofy crap. The more it happens the sooner the crash will come and things will get back to normal. It's going to suck, it's going to be expensive, a lot of 401ks are going to wind up useless because stocks are going to crash when it happens - but happen it must.

      This is why process/programming patents are a bad idea. Not just a bad idea for business but a bad idea for the economy. When the patent crash comes - then they'll know. All that IP value will suddenly evaporate. It's going to be horrific.

      And the big companies know it too. That's why MS isn't trying to collect for the FAT file system. They know that they'd take in X amount of dollars, but they're risking a patent war where they may lose X*10,000 if their IP portfolio is suddenly invalidated in a patent war. It's not worth the risk. That's why you see these big idiot companies patenting all this crap but never trying to collect on any of it. They know what would happen.

      And the nice side effect is that they never ever have to worry about Joe's New Idea ever putting them out of business too. That's nice, of course.

      --
      Weaselmancer
      rediculous.
    9. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by eddeye · · Score: 1

      Because the more idiot patents like this that get granted, the sooner this mess will end.
      ...
      First reason - the dumber a patent is, and the more obvious it is that you are merely patenting something someone else came up with - the more likely it is that a judge somewhere will get that clue we've all been waiting for.
      ...
      Second reason - World War I.

      Your logic is seriously misguided.

      The current situation is in no way any judge's fault. Shaky patents have to be litigated before they can be invalidated. But why risk litigation? Companies know which patents are shaky. You'd never risk taking this patent to court. It's much more effective to let the uncertainty hang over everyone's head, licensing the shaky patents as part of bulk portfolio cross-licensing arrangements with other major patent holders.

      Even if this patent went to court, no judge would fix the entire patent mess in one fell swoop. First, patents are invalidated by juries, not judges (except in rare cases of directed verdicts). Second, no judge will eliminate an entire class of patents like software. That would grossly overstep the bounds of any particular patent case before the judge. Judges leave the broad strokes to Congress. Such a ridiculously broad ruling from a district court would have to survive appeals to the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court. So ultimately your solution requires not "a judge somewhere getting a clue", but five Supreme Court justices sanctioning a heavy-handed betrayal of hundreds of years of judicial authority and precedent. "Not gonna happen" is an epic understatement.

      As for "patent World War", that's just as improbable. You said it yourself - companies care about making money. Alliances between them are nothing like the mutual aid treaties that started WW1. No one will rush to defend their allies as soon as it becomes unprofitable. Your patent "war" will fizzle as soon as it starts. Not to mention that if it somehow did, the resulting carnage to the Nasdaq would make things unpleasant for all of us. You don't hammer an entire industry without collateral damage to every 401k and pension plan in existence.

      Yes I am a patent lawyer.

      --
      Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.
    10. Re:It's the patent version of World War I by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      What if a football team suddenly decided throwing passes was dishonorable, and they wished other people wouldn't do it? They'd get hammered. They'd lose all over the place.

      Only in the US does this make sense. :-)

  40. Disemvowel? by crispin_bollocks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since prior art counts for little, has anyone rushed to patent disemvoweling?

  41. wtf by zmjjmz · · Score: 1

    It's in the bsdgames package, and has been around for way more than the time required to qualify for prior art.

    1. Re:wtf by zmjjmz · · Score: 1

      According to the manual, it first appeared in NetBSD 1.5. The last edit to the manual was made in 2003.

  42. stfu, ibm. srsy, u gd bmf. afcps ur awb. ur afu.

    1. Re:BS by Cwix · · Score: 1

      I was doing good till I hit afcps

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    2. Re:BS by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      AFCPS = Any Fool Can Plainly See :)

    3. Re:BS by Cwix · · Score: 1

      ahh mucho gracias, everything I came up with wasnt rated as pg

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
  43. Simple Solution, Patent Pending by BlueCoder · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let's lobby the patent office to create a wiki for lay man ideas. Then everyone normal that can't afford to patent every blog article that they can come up with on a daily basis can then upload their ideas to the database.

    This should eliminate all patents for obvious stuff. And only the 10 or so really original ideas are still patentable.

    Simple solution, maybe I should patent it...

  44. What did they patent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lookup table?

  45. Oh, for the love of... by Nekomusume · · Score: 1

    Can't somebody just patent the filing of stupid patents?

  46. Whatis bot query by stephanruby · · Score: 5, Funny

    CRAP.

    > whatis CRAP

    >>> IBM's CRAP:: Internally known as Consumer Research and Planning.

    1. Re:Whatis bot query by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      lol

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    2. Re:Whatis bot query by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      Better known outside IBM as Consumer Raping and Pillaging.

    3. Re:Whatis bot query by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IBM = Intentional Bullshit Marketing?

    4. Re:Whatis bot query by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IBM = Ingen Bra Maskin

  47. Cats by Geoff · · Score: 1

    Hmm.... I thought LOL meant "wow, that cat sure is cute"

    --

    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso

  48. just a contextual lookup-table by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how is contextual lookup-table patentable?
    isn't this being used already for language translation or in AI research as far as symbol to meaning lookup?
    what about all the thousands of types of expert systems that use context to pick an answer for the problem from many. Same difference.
    what about dictionaries, they already do this and show you all meanings though unless they are online/interactive, you still msut pick a meaning or acronym based on the usage context.

  49. I thought we were supposed to be nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...who are smart about computer technology and such.

    Why are there so many writeups that completely misinterpret their sources?

  50. I HOPE I DON'T GET FINED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    patent = {"LOL" : "laugh out loud"}
    patent["LOL"]

  51. Seriously? A patent for an acronym list. by doronbc · · Score: 1

    Somebody should send those IBMers a link to Let me google that for you

  52. I have prior art by eggman9713 · · Score: 1

    Back in high school, I had a notebook (which I think I still have) that had a list of emoticons and their meaning, and also the meaning of acronyms like lol or rofl or imho. I would consider that prior art if the patent merely is for a translation system.

  53. Parent is troll? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps you are trolling, if so - hats off to you (especially if you are responsible for any of the much less common 'definitions' on that page).

    I use acronym finder all the time to find what I am looking for. It only takes a cursory glance to figure out which definition applies. It would be worthless if it didnt include all these other confirmed definitions. It keeps all unconfirmed definitions in the attic.

    Anyways, I used this site when I was the new guy at a melt shop to figure out what an acronym meant that none of the old guys new or could remember. I had no idea what it was - but again - it only takes a cursory glance to figure it out.

  54. YSISHBIDNL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You Sure Is Shit Hadn't Better... I Don't No LOL

  55. Re:IMHO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it was:

    I aM Having Orgasms

    But I could be wrong. We really need some way of interpreting these shorthands. Oh, wait...

  56. WTF FTW by Torodung · · Score: 1

    I love the icon for this article. I wonder how their software deals with palindromic abbreviations.

    WTF FTW

  57. Analyse this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO

  58. That's not what "schizophrenia" means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Despite its etymology, schizophrenia is not the same as dissociative identity disorder, previously known as multiple personality disorder or split personality, with which it has been erroneously confused.", as Wikipedia's "schizophrenia" article notes.

    Schizophrenia is a serious illness. Using the term in this joking and inaccurate fashion is offensive to the people whose lives it affects.

  59. I see lol as a visual icon, like a smiley by rschwa · · Score: 1

    I always thought it looked like someone drowning. or surrendering.. you know
      o/ = waving hello or goodbye
    \o/ = Yay!
    o7 = a snappy salute
    lol = dont shoot!

  60. IBM LOLs with MILFs? by SoundGuyNoise · · Score: 1

    What does IBM want with Little Old Ladies?

    --
    You never expect irony, do you?
    Want to be a professional wrestler? Visit www.iyfwrestling.com
    @iyfwrestling
  61. Prior art by bl968 · · Score: 0

    This is code I used for an online web chat way back in 1996

    $input_text =~ s!( i )! I !g;
    $input_text =~ s!( np)!no problem\!!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(AFK)!\*Away from keyboard\*!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!( wb)!Welcome back :)!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(l8r)!See you later!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(brb)!\*be right back\*!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!( bbl)!I will be back later!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(bbiab)!I will be back in a bit!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(btw)!by the way!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!( IRL )!\*in real life\*!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(j\/k)!\*just kidding\* ;)!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(cya)!See you later!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!( oic)! Oh I see\!!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(GTMA)!great minds think alike!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(IMHO)!In my humble opinion!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(PMFJI)!Pardon me for jumping in here!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(wtg)!Way to go\!!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(lol)!\*laughing out loud\*!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!(rofl)!\*rolling on the floor laughing\*!gi;
    $input_text =~ s!( aka )! also known as !gi;

    Seems to meet all the definitions of the patent which means the patent meets all the specifications of patently obvious

    --
    "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
    1. Re:Prior art by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      And the background colour of your chat was See you later!an, and for some reason, no philaughing out loudogists would discuss chlorolling on the floor laughinguorcarbons in it.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  62. Well, actually "wtf" does exactly that by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    There is actually a command named "wtf" in my system (via fink) that does exactly the thing you/IBM mentions. Even with "over the net" update.

    http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/games/wtf/

    While it is tagged as "game", it is really useful especially if you are in a ssh session and someone used a weird acronym.

    If it is a co incidence that this story has "wtf" icon, it is really amazing :) The command really does exactly what IBM says.

  63. Prior Art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_code, patent invalidated , case closed.

  64. They sure need this tech by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

    Did you hear the names of IBM Mainframe OS utilties? Those are "light" things, which are supposed to be easy to use and remember.

    Lets say, one is called "IEHPROGM"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_mainframe_utility_programs

    1. Re:They sure need this tech by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Sadly I do remember the bastard things, and all that JCL shite too.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  65. IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Irregular Bowel Movement

  66. This patent is tagged ... by PPH · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  67. wts? by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

    The pic of three letters given to this story reads "wts" and not "wtf". The last character is the archaic form of "s" when it is the last letter in a word.

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    1. Re:wts? by Fruit · · Score: 1

      If you're referring to the long s, you only use that one if it's not the last letter of the word (or syllable, usually). That just means the image is doubly wrong.

  68. I did this in the 1990s by Joe+U · · Score: 1

    Seriously,

    How is this different from the old Galacticomm "action commands" in the chat rooms? /l You're funny turns into "Joe User laughs out loud 'You're funny'. (Done in 1992)
    The commands could be customized or turned off as well, also they could change based on the person doing it.

    Or how about when developers at my company turned :) into graphics for smileys in realtime web chat (in 1996).

    So, what are they trying to patent?

  69. LGYPR by indi0144 · · Score: 1

    ladies...

    there, the sound of hordes of lawyers humping on you.

    1. Re:LGYPR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get your pencils ready?

  70. Read the FUCKING article. by howlingfrog · · Score: 1

    This IS NOT a patent on the use of abbreviations.
    This IS NOT a patent on the use of a lookup table to interpret abbreviations.
    This IS a patent on a specific algorithm for automatically creating multiple lookup tables for abbreviations.
    This IS a patent on a specific algorithm for deciding which lookup table to use based on who's talking to whom about what.

    It's far enough outside my area of expertise that I don't know if it's original enough and nonobvious enough to be patentable, but it is absolutely not an Amazon one-click situation.

    Editors, please actually read the articles and pay specific attention to whether or not they even vaguely match the submitter's summary. As I mentioned before, this is not my area of expertise, and I had no trouble figuring out what was actually being patented.

    --
    The original Howling Frog is a fictional character and has no UID.
  71. Arrrrrggggghhhh by Allnighterking · · Score: 1

    My face found it impossible to reach my palm fast enough. The reason no one else has patented it before is simple "IT'S BLOODY OBVIOUS". Unless of course you're a USPTO examiner.

    --

    I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.

  72. Look on the bright side by m50d · · Score: 1

    This means IBM will be able to stop people using it.

    --
    I am trolling
  73. 'Lol' is just a dutch word by xonen · · Score: 1

    'Lol' is a dutch word, meaning more or less 'fun' or 'funny'. You could say it instead of laughing, almost exactly like it is internationally used now in chat. Claiming it means 'laughing out loud' may explain the meaning, but is historic anything but correct.

    Way before internet existed, we used the word 'lol' in the classroom like this: we would use a simple digital calculator, hold it upside down, and while mentioning 'what you get when you add lol to lol', typed in 707 + 707 and the answer (upside down) would read 'hihi' (='haha' or 'hehe',...also in dutch).

    It's funny how people claim new meanings, or even 'inventing' an abbreviating. Whereas it's true roots are in dutch ppl saying 'lol' over some (international) chat, where it got picked up by you english speaking fellows.

    just fyi...

    --
    A glitch a day keeps the bugs away.
  74. Couldn't they just publish the idea, not patent? by niks42 · · Score: 1

    When submitting inventions in IBM, there used to be three possible outcomes. One was it got trashed. Another was it got filed. The third was that it would be published in the IBM Journal of Research and Development. This would protect IBM in the event of some other company filing some spurious patent, by clearly demonstrating prior art. Since I am now an ex-IBMerI don't know if this still happens these days. Would "publish" not be more appropriate for such a trivial "invention" as a look-up table, which should fail any test of obviousness?

  75. IBM, please patent this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    UYA = Up Your As*

  76. Re:IMHO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wrong.

  77. Re:IMHO by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

    IMHO you are wrong, it is humble.

  78. IJTFO by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

    It's almost like a spellchecker, except it's not, but it is, but it's slightly different so it's not. Either way, neither should be patentable in a sane society. It's just too fucking obvious.

  79. Not harsh enough. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    Dear IBM:

    FOAD

  80. GLGBNAFT... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "GLGBNAFT"

      --Ice T