Legally, you can patent a business model. You shouldn't be able to. But the fact is you can.
If IBM didn't do this, they could get nailed in court by someone else. While it is possible to establish prior art without getting a patent, a patent makes it easier and more certain. Reference the Eolas/Microsoft case. The Eolas patent on plugins was ludicrous. Had Microsft patented some of their technologies that integrated MS Office products, Eolas would have lost on prior art grounds. Yet they won. Microsoft lost because they failed to file for a patent.
If I was running a company, I'd patent everything I legally could- the only thing that would stop me would be not being able to afford the patent and lawyer fees, which IBM can. IBM has to cover their ass.
IBM would by default own the copyright, as a work for hire deal. If you wanted anyone else to own it, you'd have to hash it out in the contract, if the contract does not name a copyright holder for the completed work it defaults to IBM.
They would not gain previous copyrights automatically through this patent. They only could get the copyrights if the owner voluntarily transferred them or is done as work for hire. They also would not gain copyrights for work paid for by other entities via their patented method, however they could sue the entity that paid for the work and possibly gain copyright as part of a settlement agreement.
If IBM uses this system, didnt patent it, they could be screwed if someone else "invents" it two years from now and sues IBM over it. This way, that case begins and ends with the words "Case Dismissed". A patent gives you a crystal clear prior art defense.
Well, IBM rarely brings out its patents, and from the SCO case, the patents they countersued on suggested IBM could shatter the tech industry if they decided to throw down with their full weight.
I doubt we will see these patents used unless IBM needs to countersue someone on a relevant issue. The situation still bears watching in case I'm wrong, but I wouldn't really worry. IBM has an incredible number of patents that they could abuse, but don't.
to throw together a 5 minute app in Visual Basic to do this stuff? Ok, maybe an hour to include a heavy test phase.
If they need more precision than an x86-32 box can give them, there are plenty of 64 bit systems that they can hack together a quick C or C++ or really any language- a conversion program doesnt' require any complicated math, and simple math such as that is trivial to code in any language I've seen. Hell, they could create a UDT fairly easily to represent floating point with an integer to represent each side of the decimal if the issues with binary floating point will throw it off too far.
I don't get it... what the hell is their problem?
Or screw the conversions outright, and make the entire project, from the most trivial piece of gear to the planning and execution phase use metric. Or all use American measures. There is no way in hell these goofs are acceptable mistakes.
I think the Jedi showing anger was likely a show of the rise of the Dark Side and its subtle influences, and along with the calm, contemplative Yoda thowing down and fighting on the front lines, showing just how desperate things are becoming.
When Yoda is commanding troops in battle, making split second decisions, and drawing his saber, you know that things are coming quickly to a head.
Even Hitler had some good qualities. He was a brave man- his record from WWI is one of the best of any soldiers, in any army, ever, period. He was intelligent, charasmatic, and commited. He was also an incredibly talented painter.
If he had pushed for world peace(through means other than subjugation)... things would be different. Its a pity really... he could have done more good for the world than anyone in recent memory. It is sad that opportunity was lost.
My point is... no surprse that Bill Gates has redeeming qualities- even the worst people do.
If the app dealt with numbers that need 64 bits to natively represent, and dealt with them primarily(like some sort of numerics program) then a 64 bit binary will probably win.
You misunderstood what I said. Yes, the transports we have now are used constantly. But if we bought enough military transport aircraft to free us from the need for the civil air reserve, most of that fleet would sit idle.
There is a civil air reserve program, where the government can in fact commandeer civilian aircraft to move troops. Its either that or vastly increasing the Air Force budget so we can maintain huge numbers of transport aircraft that almost never get used.
As Field Marshall Rommel said, no nation goes to war more incompetently than the United States, but no nation ends a war better than the United States. We might not keep the lessons very long, but we learn them quickly.
How about World War I. 18 miles outside of Paris the French army was in full retreat, and told the US Marine officers heading to the front to give up, there was absolutely no chance of saving Paris. The 4th Marine Brigade stopped the German advance cold.
THAT is cowardice. WWII, perhaps not, but WWI, they were cowards who were less dedicated to protecting their own capital city than a few thousand Americans were.
There was also the absolute incompetence(though they were not cowards there) at Dien Bien Phu, which they could have won.
"core team was no longer representative of the active, experienced and skilled XFree86 developers"
That leads me to suspect it isn't XFree86 that is dying, just the current core team is giving up their posts- and probably to be reorganized with new members from among the referred to "active, experienced... developers"
Good point. We had to have someone do that when I locked the keys in the car(engine running too!) after my failed driving test.
An OnStar crack still has a couple advantages though. You can sit on a bench with a laptop, eating lunch, and open your target car without anyone knowning you are doing anything. Starting it might be a problem still, but you will be in the car without doing anything to tip off witnesses. You stick a slim jim in a car door, someone walking by at the wrong time can instantly know you are trying to break in. Not so with an OnStar crack.
Also, cracking OnStar would free you from the quirks of different models of car locks. Not all are in exactly the same place or work exactly the same, so the slim jim technique could hang you up a few extra seconds if it throws you something you don't expect.
Knowing how to use a slim jim will still be a valuable skill for a professional car thief, but being able to crack OnStar will also be valuable.
People crack computer systems all the time with information(passwords) that they aren't supposed to be able to get without being on the inside. It is probably just a matter of time before someone figures out how to do that with OnStar. Be it social engineering the needed info out of someone, or finding a security flaw in the OnStar hardware/software setup, it will happen someday.
And while it might be more difficult than smashing in the window, it leaves the car in perfect condition. That gives more options for using the car or reselling it.
The helicopters - not planes - that Saddam used to gas the Kurds were from Bell Helicopter Textron and Hughes, which are both US companies. Any planes Saddam had have been grounded (and indeed, literally buried) since the No-Fly Zone was established after Gulf War 1.
Saddam gassed the Kurds during the Iran-Iraq war, well before Gulf War I which resulted in the no-fly zones. Your statement here shows you know absolutely nothing about that incident.
educate yourself, before the next time you go spouting off about things you know nothing about.
Determine the worst that could happen if things go wrong, and put it in the country that could best handle that sort of disaster, either through quick and effective containment or simple isolation in the boonies- whichever will keep the people safest until it can be fully contained.
Slashdot Mirror
#1 if you judge by food quality rather than the balance sheet.
Legally, you can patent a business model. You shouldn't be able to. But the fact is you can.
If IBM didn't do this, they could get nailed in court by someone else. While it is possible to establish prior art without getting a patent, a patent makes it easier and more certain. Reference the Eolas/Microsoft case. The Eolas patent on plugins was ludicrous. Had Microsft patented some of their technologies that integrated MS Office products, Eolas would have lost on prior art grounds. Yet they won. Microsoft lost because they failed to file for a patent.
If I was running a company, I'd patent everything I legally could- the only thing that would stop me would be not being able to afford the patent and lawyer fees, which IBM can. IBM has to cover their ass.
IBM would by default own the copyright, as a work for hire deal. If you wanted anyone else to own it, you'd have to hash it out in the contract, if the contract does not name a copyright holder for the completed work it defaults to IBM.
They would not gain previous copyrights automatically through this patent. They only could get the copyrights if the owner voluntarily transferred them or is done as work for hire. They also would not gain copyrights for work paid for by other entities via their patented method, however they could sue the entity that paid for the work and possibly gain copyright as part of a settlement agreement.
IBM would not own the SCO code.
exactly- pure defense.
If IBM uses this system, didnt patent it, they could be screwed if someone else "invents" it two years from now and sues IBM over it. This way, that case begins and ends with the words "Case Dismissed". A patent gives you a crystal clear prior art defense.
Well, IBM rarely brings out its patents, and from the SCO case, the patents they countersued on suggested IBM could shatter the tech industry if they decided to throw down with their full weight.
I doubt we will see these patents used unless IBM needs to countersue someone on a relevant issue. The situation still bears watching in case I'm wrong, but I wouldn't really worry. IBM has an incredible number of patents that they could abuse, but don't.
to throw together a 5 minute app in Visual Basic to do this stuff? Ok, maybe an hour to include a heavy test phase.
If they need more precision than an x86-32 box can give them, there are plenty of 64 bit systems that they can hack together a quick C or C++ or really any language- a conversion program doesnt' require any complicated math, and simple math such as that is trivial to code in any language I've seen. Hell, they could create a UDT fairly easily to represent floating point with an integer to represent each side of the decimal if the issues with binary floating point will throw it off too far.
I don't get it... what the hell is their problem?
Or screw the conversions outright, and make the entire project, from the most trivial piece of gear to the planning and execution phase use metric. Or all use American measures. There is no way in hell these goofs are acceptable mistakes.
I think the Jedi showing anger was likely a show of the rise of the Dark Side and its subtle influences, and along with the calm, contemplative Yoda thowing down and fighting on the front lines, showing just how desperate things are becoming.
When Yoda is commanding troops in battle, making split second decisions, and drawing his saber, you know that things are coming quickly to a head.
Even Hitler had some good qualities. He was a brave man- his record from WWI is one of the best of any soldiers, in any army, ever, period. He was intelligent, charasmatic, and commited. He was also an incredibly talented painter.
If he had pushed for world peace(through means other than subjugation)... things would be different. Its a pity really... he could have done more good for the world than anyone in recent memory. It is sad that opportunity was lost.
My point is... no surprse that Bill Gates has redeeming qualities- even the worst people do.
If the app dealt with numbers that need 64 bits to natively represent, and dealt with them primarily(like some sort of numerics program) then a 64 bit binary will probably win.
You misunderstood what I said. Yes, the transports we have now are used constantly. But if we bought enough military transport aircraft to free us from the need for the civil air reserve, most of that fleet would sit idle.
There is a civil air reserve program, where the government can in fact commandeer civilian aircraft to move troops. Its either that or vastly increasing the Air Force budget so we can maintain huge numbers of transport aircraft that almost never get used.
What in the fucking hell is Darl McBride smoking? He gets dumber by the minute.
It was 18 miles. German artillery shells were already landing in Paris.
He said that after Africa, referring mainly to how quickly the Americans went from whipping boys to winning. It was said during the war.
As Field Marshall Rommel said, no nation goes to war more incompetently than the United States, but no nation ends a war better than the United States. We might not keep the lessons very long, but we learn them quickly.
How about World War I. 18 miles outside of Paris the French army was in full retreat, and told the US Marine officers heading to the front to give up, there was absolutely no chance of saving Paris. The 4th Marine Brigade stopped the German advance cold.
THAT is cowardice. WWII, perhaps not, but WWI, they were cowards who were less dedicated to protecting their own capital city than a few thousand Americans were.
There was also the absolute incompetence(though they were not cowards there) at Dien Bien Phu, which they could have won.
I want to see that... need to track down a copy somewhere...
"core team was no longer
representative of the active, experienced and skilled XFree86 developers"
That leads me to suspect it isn't XFree86 that is dying, just the current core team is giving up their posts- and probably to be reorganized with new members from among the referred to "active, experienced... developers"
I wouldn't panic yet.
Good point. We had to have someone do that when I locked the keys in the car(engine running too!) after my failed driving test.
An OnStar crack still has a couple advantages though. You can sit on a bench with a laptop, eating lunch, and open your target car without anyone knowning you are doing anything. Starting it might be a problem still, but you will be in the car without doing anything to tip off witnesses. You stick a slim jim in a car door, someone walking by at the wrong time can instantly know you are trying to break in. Not so with an OnStar crack.
Also, cracking OnStar would free you from the quirks of different models of car locks. Not all are in exactly the same place or work exactly the same, so the slim jim technique could hang you up a few extra seconds if it throws you something you don't expect.
Knowing how to use a slim jim will still be a valuable skill for a professional car thief, but being able to crack OnStar will also be valuable.
People crack computer systems all the time with information(passwords) that they aren't supposed to be able to get without being on the inside. It is probably just a matter of time before someone figures out how to do that with OnStar. Be it social engineering the needed info out of someone, or finding a security flaw in the OnStar hardware/software setup, it will happen someday.
And while it might be more difficult than smashing in the window, it leaves the car in perfect condition. That gives more options for using the car or reselling it.
Darl gets the Grape flavor I assume?
Two seperate statements may have been your intent, but the way you phrased it made it seem otherwise.
However, the US provided quite a bit of intelligence to Iraq, which can often prove to be much more valuable than any number of guns.
The helicopters - not planes - that Saddam used to gas the Kurds were from Bell Helicopter Textron and Hughes, which are both US companies. Any planes Saddam had have been grounded (and indeed, literally buried) since the No-Fly Zone was established after Gulf War 1.
Saddam gassed the Kurds during the Iran-Iraq war, well before Gulf War I which resulted in the no-fly zones. Your statement here shows you know absolutely nothing about that incident.
educate yourself, before the next time you go spouting off about things you know nothing about.
I recommend you do the same.
Determine the worst that could happen if things go wrong, and put it in the country that could best handle that sort of disaster, either through quick and effective containment or simple isolation in the boonies- whichever will keep the people safest until it can be fully contained.