Yep but why start rejecting based on obviousness *now* ? I can't recall details (exercise for the reader) but over the years there have been countless obvious patents which weren't rejected - rounded corners? hello?
Uhh, isn't that the point being made? That Sony might have manufactured a gun pointed at their head to prevent them from releasing the movie? i.e. not voluntarily.
Alternately, nobody I know had even heard of the movie before the hacks, so I'm wondering if the ENTIRE THING is just a sony PR stunt (not the hacks themselves, but their reaction to them)
Good point. In the interests of historical accuracy, all shows should include aggressive chain-smoking. To do otherwise would portray a diminished control over the health of the general population.
I'm going to go off on a tin-foil-hat tangent and say that the whole thing is about control of the internet and the mind- and freedom-enhancing benefits enabled by such interpersonal communication.
and all of this is ignoring the fact I can't justify $10-$20 for 90 minutes of content I'm going to watch all of once, get fucked.
What are you, some kind of kill-joy? How are the studios to fund location shoots in every major capital city and thus funnel cash into these cities' coffers if you don't foot the bill? What's wrong with you?
More importantly IMO, I feel that the idea that Assange might have raped someone did more to remove/prevent support amongst ordinary people than did the idea that he "assisted 'espionage'". Part of a multi-pronged ad-hominem.
Perhaps the question of how best to smear the next Assange should be thrown open as an 'Ask Slashdot ?'
Non-police don't have the training and experience required to allow them to perform the duties of a real police officer - there's substantial risk of donut overdose.
Slashdot Mirror
Somewhat hypocritical given that your *name* is someone else's intellectual property.
Because the powers-that-be find it inconvenient to scan every physical item of mail?
I forgot to add, add massive corruption to determine where contests are held and which communities benefit from the flood-plain effect.
Not insurmountable - hand out performance-enhancing drugs, bots and hitbox hacks and you've made a good start.
A taxi without rounded edges?
Yes, your.
Yep but why start rejecting based on obviousness *now* ? I can't recall details (exercise for the reader) but over the years there have been countless obvious patents which weren't rejected - rounded corners? hello?
It seems pretty suspiciuos that the USPO only now has started to do their jobs - just when UBER's patent-applications crossed their desks.
Yep, you could use it to generate pron scenarios involving lifelike fake-boobs, -lips, -butts, -affection.
Really? Reverse-astroturfing FTW.
i.e. "the rest of the world."
No thanks Sony dude. Free is too expensive.
Uhh, isn't that the point being made? That Sony might have manufactured a gun pointed at their head to prevent them from releasing the movie? i.e. not voluntarily.
Which movie?
This appears to be the lesson provided by your rulers.
Yeah, cause everyone wants to live in a tolerant society with good standards of health-care / community spirit / sanity.
Oh wait...
I note that it's quicker to download a FLAC version of a CD I've just bought than format-shift it manually.
Really? Do you have any tips to make the best of the experience?
Good point. In the interests of historical accuracy, all shows should include aggressive chain-smoking. To do otherwise would portray a diminished control over the health of the general population.
I'm going to go off on a tin-foil-hat tangent and say that the whole thing is about control of the internet and the mind- and freedom-enhancing benefits enabled by such interpersonal communication.
Ie. Not about piracy.
I wouldn't say it's pointless to try; they play their part in the arms race and help breed a better opponent.
What are you, some kind of kill-joy? How are the studios to fund location shoots in every major capital city and thus funnel cash into these cities' coffers if you don't foot the bill? What's wrong with you?
More importantly IMO, I feel that the idea that Assange might have raped someone did more to remove/prevent support amongst ordinary people than did the idea that he "assisted 'espionage'". Part of a multi-pronged ad-hominem.
Perhaps the question of how best to smear the next Assange should be thrown open as an 'Ask Slashdot ?'
How is this flamebait? Referring to widely acknowledged lies used to obtain something otherwise unavailable isn't breaking the rules.
Non-police don't have the training and experience required to allow them to perform the duties of a real police officer - there's substantial risk of donut overdose.