This is the work of a serious research organization, and without it wireless networks would be a lot less useful.^W^W^W^W^W^W^W^Wsomeone else would have done it.
Fixed it for you, no charge this time, drive through.
And at the same time if a reasonably skilled person in the specific industry is found to have duplicated the described invention without recourse to the patent, then the patent should be invalid.
Willful infringement should be the only way to lose a patent suit, in other words. Otherwise, yes, the patent does, indeed, cover something "obvious."
Yep. If they had reason to believe someone had released mercury in a cargo hold, the outcome would be like the old practical joke where someone releases two pigs in their high school building late at night, with "#1" spray-painted on one of them and "#3" on the other.
They will never find pig #2, but they will take the whole school apart with a screwdriver looking for it.
That's basically the TSA's entire organizational charter: "Find Pig #2."
Unless they're the author, or have read the author saying so, they're creating the hidden meaning
That's a topic of some debate. Tolkien swore that the LotR books weren't the least bit allegorical, for instance, yet how can you read them without seeing Mordor as 1930s-era Germany?
It's pretty common for writers to insist that they weren't trying to plant the subtexts in their work that everyone else can see.
Just as the Second Amendment doesn't mean I can own a nuclear bazooka, the First Amendment doesn't mean I can squat in a public area with established rules against overnight camping.
Look at what Homeland Security did to the Occupiers
If it's an act of "speech" when an unwashed coalition of street bums and trust-fund anarchists seize public property for private use, then you might have something resembling a point.
Maybe, but I'm not convinced that free speech should be inviolable. I think that the damage done to the UK from restrictions that exist on free speech are outweighed by the damage done to the UK from racism.
Congratulations for falling for a false dichotomy. Here in the US, we hear similar arguments: "I think the damage done to Americans' civil liberties by the TSA is outweighed by the damage done by terrorists."
It's true that we have sacrificed some of our freedoms since 9/11, including the freedom to travel without being irradiated or sexually assaulted, but it's far from clear that we gained any security by doing so. Likewise, your country has thrown freedom of expression under the bus, but do you have a less-racist society than ours, as a result? I seriously doubt it.
If taking your freedom of speech didn't improve your life, then somebody lied to you. You should be pissed about that.
When the Feds handed drivers the shit sandwich that was the 55 MPH National Maximum Speed Limit, Mike Valentine and Jim Jaeger made lemonade to go with it, pulling down hundreds of millions of dollars selling radar detectors.
So, as an entrepreneur I'd like the chance to do something similar, helping the citizens to work around their own berserk government while getting paid like a rock star. NHTSA can bring it on. If my company doesn't sell an aftermarket navigation system that works, someone else will.
I don't disagree with you -- it is far too easy to hide behind the corporate veil in this country. But the GP advocated fining the company enough to send them into bankruptcy. That amounts to a belly-flopping high dive down the rabbit hole of unforeseen consequences.
Also, it's kind of dismaying that so many people rant about the merits of a single-sourced machine made up out of very very closed hardware. The original PC-AT was made almost entirely with off-the-shelf Intel chips, and even early '386 motherboards from some suppliers were made that way. Compare that to plastic-cased closed-hardware boxes and for some reason people get all frothy about the closed boxes... Just doesn't make sense.
A lot of it comes down to Microsoft Derangement Syndrome. People who still mutter about how great the Amiga was and how Bill Gates painted the steps at the nursing home with nitrogen tri-iodide back in junior high shouldn't expect entire markets to form around their personal hangups. Yet they expect just that.
it is that unaided state surveillance is too expensive to survive(y hello thar, East Germany) and tends to stifle out of fear the new technologies that would ultimately help it prosper(rather like the MPAA...)
Couple of things.
1) Cameras are a lot cheaper now.
2) East Germans weren't primarily afraid of the Stasi. They were afraid of their own neighbors. The surveillance state successfully co-opted the populace into doing its grunt work for free. That part hasn't changed, and won't, because at the end of the day, people are finks.
So, yes, unaided state surveillance may be too expensive to be feasible... but it wasn't, and won't, be unaided.
Your conspiracy theory requires some substantiation as does mine. Yours more so than mine, as you directly impugn the integrity of a specific person.
Have you been hiding on the far side of the moon for the past several days? Daisey was recently unmasked as an unreliable narrator, to put it charitably. He has offered no defense other than muttering something about being an "entertainer" rather than a "journalist."
That excuse doesn't absolve Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly of spreading bullshit and calling it fertilizer, so it shouldn't be a free pass for Michael Moore and Mike Daisey, either.
What evidence do we have that Foxconn dutifully reports every suicide amonst its workforce, and that the totals are reported accurately?
We should have exactly the same confidence in the statistics surrounding Foxconn-related suicides that we have in our knowledge of the suicide rate of the general Chinese population -- i.e., not much at all.
You can always tell who's in a leadership position in any given organization or industry, because they're the ones with all the arrows and knives sticking out of their backs. Does it ever occur to any of the bleeding hearts who inhabit these threads that various corporations have strong financial incentives to stir up as much anti-Apple FUD as possible? Follow the money behind the Mike Daisey debacle, and I'll bet it leads back to Google. (Hey, that's as good a conspiracy theory as yours.)
Slashdot Mirror
attacks on ...religion because those demand loyalty to something other than the state
Stop. You're killing me here.
It's an indisputably good thing that, historically, not everything that could have been patented was, in fact, patented.
That should give pro-patent advocates some pause for consideration.
This is the work of a serious research organization, and without it wireless networks would be a lot less useful.^W^W^W^W^W^W^W^Wsomeone else would have done it.
Fixed it for you, no charge this time, drive through.
And at the same time if a reasonably skilled person in the specific industry is found to have duplicated the described invention without recourse to the patent, then the patent should be invalid.
Willful infringement should be the only way to lose a patent suit, in other words. Otherwise, yes, the patent does, indeed, cover something "obvious."
If you are not able to understand this language so yeah it sucks from your point of view
How... American of you.
Well, they certainly have made major advances in the field of astroturfing.
Yep. If they had reason to believe someone had released mercury in a cargo hold, the outcome would be like the old practical joke where someone releases two pigs in their high school building late at night, with "#1" spray-painted on one of them and "#3" on the other.
They will never find pig #2, but they will take the whole school apart with a screwdriver looking for it.
That's basically the TSA's entire organizational charter: "Find Pig #2."
Unless they're the author, or have read the author saying so, they're creating the hidden meaning
That's a topic of some debate. Tolkien swore that the LotR books weren't the least bit allegorical, for instance, yet how can you read them without seeing Mordor as 1930s-era Germany?
It's pretty common for writers to insist that they weren't trying to plant the subtexts in their work that everyone else can see.
Or mercury, which would really do a number on a plane.
Well, by and large, these aren't people with a history of making good decisions, so I wouldn't be surprised if they disagree with me.
Would you prefer they pitch their tents on the steps of city hall?
Yes. To the extent their beef is a legitimate one, it's with the government, not banks, brokerage houses, hedge funds, or private industry.
The only reason the bankers have enough power to hose our society is because the government gave it to them.
Just as the Second Amendment doesn't mean I can own a nuclear bazooka, the First Amendment doesn't mean I can squat in a public area with established rules against overnight camping.
I think you bumped your radio dial. You're apparently holding a completely different conversation, and with someone you only imagine you can hear.
But that's just as true here. No prison sentences were required.
With apologies to Cory Doctorow: if squatting on public property is "Free Speech," then jaywalking is "Rape of Traffic."
Look at what Homeland Security did to the Occupiers
If it's an act of "speech" when an unwashed coalition of street bums and trust-fund anarchists seize public property for private use, then you might have something resembling a point.
As it is, I want my 2,622 bytes of RAM back.
Maybe, but I'm not convinced that free speech should be inviolable. I think that the damage done to the UK from restrictions that exist on free speech are outweighed by the damage done to the UK from racism.
Congratulations for falling for a false dichotomy. Here in the US, we hear similar arguments: "I think the damage done to Americans' civil liberties by the TSA is outweighed by the damage done by terrorists."
It's true that we have sacrificed some of our freedoms since 9/11, including the freedom to travel without being irradiated or sexually assaulted, but it's far from clear that we gained any security by doing so. Likewise, your country has thrown freedom of expression under the bus, but do you have a less-racist society than ours, as a result? I seriously doubt it.
If taking your freedom of speech didn't improve your life, then somebody lied to you. You should be pissed about that.
When the Feds handed drivers the shit sandwich that was the 55 MPH National Maximum Speed Limit, Mike Valentine and Jim Jaeger made lemonade to go with it, pulling down hundreds of millions of dollars selling radar detectors.
So, as an entrepreneur I'd like the chance to do something similar, helping the citizens to work around their own berserk government while getting paid like a rock star. NHTSA can bring it on. If my company doesn't sell an aftermarket navigation system that works, someone else will.
I don't disagree with you -- it is far too easy to hide behind the corporate veil in this country. But the GP advocated fining the company enough to send them into bankruptcy. That amounts to a belly-flopping high dive down the rabbit hole of unforeseen consequences.
Wow... if regulatory capture wasn't a problem before, wait until we implement your suggestions.
Also, it's kind of dismaying that so many people rant about the merits of a single-sourced machine made up out of very very closed hardware. The original PC-AT was made almost entirely with off-the-shelf Intel chips, and even early '386 motherboards from some suppliers were made that way. Compare that to plastic-cased closed-hardware boxes and for some reason people get all frothy about the closed boxes... Just doesn't make sense.
A lot of it comes down to Microsoft Derangement Syndrome. People who still mutter about how great the Amiga was and how Bill Gates painted the steps at the nursing home with nitrogen tri-iodide back in junior high shouldn't expect entire markets to form around their personal hangups. Yet they expect just that.
it is that unaided state surveillance is too expensive to survive(y hello thar, East Germany) and tends to stifle out of fear the new technologies that would ultimately help it prosper(rather like the MPAA...)
Couple of things.
1) Cameras are a lot cheaper now.
2) East Germans weren't primarily afraid of the Stasi. They were afraid of their own neighbors. The surveillance state successfully co-opted the populace into doing its grunt work for free. That part hasn't changed, and won't, because at the end of the day, people are finks.
So, yes, unaided state surveillance may be too expensive to be feasible... but it wasn't, and won't, be unaided.
Exactly. The whole point of my post was to illustrate that one wacky conspiracy theory is as good as another.
Your conspiracy theory requires some substantiation as does mine. Yours more so than mine, as you directly impugn the integrity of a specific person.
Have you been hiding on the far side of the moon for the past several days? Daisey was recently unmasked as an unreliable narrator, to put it charitably. He has offered no defense other than muttering something about being an "entertainer" rather than a "journalist."
That excuse doesn't absolve Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly of spreading bullshit and calling it fertilizer, so it shouldn't be a free pass for Michael Moore and Mike Daisey, either.
What evidence do we have that Foxconn dutifully reports every suicide amonst its workforce, and that the totals are reported accurately?
We should have exactly the same confidence in the statistics surrounding Foxconn-related suicides that we have in our knowledge of the suicide rate of the general Chinese population -- i.e., not much at all.
You can always tell who's in a leadership position in any given organization or industry, because they're the ones with all the arrows and knives sticking out of their backs. Does it ever occur to any of the bleeding hearts who inhabit these threads that various corporations have strong financial incentives to stir up as much anti-Apple FUD as possible? Follow the money behind the Mike Daisey debacle, and I'll bet it leads back to Google. (Hey, that's as good a conspiracy theory as yours.)