That's great, if you're making everything out of iron. Including your food, your computer parts, your spacesuits...Iron objects will be the least of the Mars colony's worries for a very long time.
What is really needed to stop the bleeding (short of banning software patents entirely) is requiring patent applications to come with implementations. If you've patented a widget, build one and submit it. If your patented process is too large or complex for that to be practicable, you get a pass--but software should never be in that category!
You want to patent 1-click ordering? Submit a runnable program to demonstrate the code you want patented.
That would raise the costs of submarine patenting, as you'd have to do more of the development gruntwork before you could sue the people who proved it was profitable. Plus, it'd return some of the spurs to innovation, as people could read the published patent and be able to put it to use easier.
Personally, the other reform I'd favor (this also goes for copyright) is a very short period of monopoly, followed by a longer period of forced licensing. For 5 years, you can prevent anyone from using your idea. For 30 years after that, anyone who uses your idea must pay you royalties of x%, but you can't stop them from using your idea. After that, it's public domain.
Nevertheless, the colonists were feeding themselves within a couple years, and the only things they needed from the mother country were manufactured goods. Even then, basic things like axes and plows could be made right there.
That's a far cry from a moon or mars base, where until greenhouse farming on a large scale could be set up, they'd be dependent on Earth for basically everything, and any sort of complex widget (the equivalent of axes and plows) would have to be shipped out, with the concomitant delays.
They also started paying off, or at least requiring no new huge investment, very quickly. Mars missions, on the other hand, will need to receive ever-increasing funding for long periods before they can even approach what the Jamestown settlers could do in 1609.
On nbc.com, they use the commercials to cover the loading time. I.E, while the next 10 minutes loads completely enough to play through without stopping, they show a 30-second spot. I don't object, as the alternative is watching nothing while it loads or having the show stop partway through.
Commercials like that do have a future.
As to feeds from content source,
NBC.com has poor graphics quality but loads quickly (not a surprising tradeoff). Sometimes it hangs but I think that's my computer's fault--3-year-old laptop optimized for portability rather than power and not updated at all. The ads aren't terribly intrusive, and they appear to mask the loading time, so it's not like I could get the content any faster anyhow.
It's still a mark of how pathetic the Democrats are that they can't even bring themselves to take extremely popular measures. It's one thing to do whatever the polls say (both Clinton and the Republican Congress, 1994-2000), it's another to manipulate the public so the polls agree with what you want to do (Bush administration, 2001-2006), but those are understandable. The current Democrats are ignoring the polls in support of the policies of their enemies. I really don't understand it--after controlling Congress for 2 years, they're not going to be able to blame Bush for Iraq in 2008 if they don't lift a finger to get out of there.
It looks to me like they're taking incredibly stupid political advice from strategists who should be fired.
I've gone completely computer. I buy a lot of DVDs, download through Itunes, and watch off network websites (specifically Heroes on NBC.com). The last one is free, but relatively low-quality (but will tide me over 'til the DVDs arrive). A whole season of a good show goes for
I think this is the future of content provision--over the internet, straight from the content companies' websites. Speed and quality will increase, the content companies will start charging on a pay-per-view or subscription basis for the good stuff/good quality, a large number of individual plans will proliferate, and the cable companies will be reduced to ISPs.
Since the Republicans made such a joke of the Clinton impeachment, any attempt to impeach Bush will be seen as partisan gamesmanship, even if it's justified.
Plus, the Democrats are complete sissies, ninnies, pansies, and lots of other unflattering words ending in -ies. Witness their patheticness on Iraq. If they can't get together and demand what 70% of the country wants, what makes you think they'll take any political risks at all?
Dell's never given me trouble with my extended warranty with them. I describe the symptoms, suffer through the pointless troubleshooting checklist, they send out a replacement part (and a tech if the part's hard to replace).
My experience with Dell warranty support is enough to make me want to buy Dell again, which, considering how shitty their systems are, is indeed remarkable. But yes, I am a satisfied Dell customer.
The Poles, Czechs, and Hungarians would disagree with you, and be very happy about being able to.
Russia's sphere of influence is about where it was in the late 1920s, a bit less in central asia.
And it's free, so I don't mind. They start charging for viewing off the website, their quality best shoot up like Isaac painting the future, or I'm gone.
I don't even mind the ads, 'cause they keep it free.
I don't have a TV. I buy DVDs and watch shows online (currently going through Heroes on NBC.com).
It's vastly superior, though the video quality on nbc.com sucks. I hope they're counting my hits and basing at least part of their business model on that.
If I read right, you have to click on a long link, whose destination is nonobvious, to activate this. That restricts this, like most other internet security threats, to the (multitudes of) total idiots.
Am I reading TFA wrong?
Your point was so horribly overstated I must have walked right under it.
E-mail addresses and names are so personal and private...if you're that worried, sign up for ITMS with a throwaway email address.
Slashdot Mirror
STFU. IMHO AFAIK IANAL, LOL.
That's great, if you're making everything out of iron. Including your food, your computer parts, your spacesuits...Iron objects will be the least of the Mars colony's worries for a very long time.
What is really needed to stop the bleeding (short of banning software patents entirely) is requiring patent applications to come with implementations. If you've patented a widget, build one and submit it. If your patented process is too large or complex for that to be practicable, you get a pass--but software should never be in that category! You want to patent 1-click ordering? Submit a runnable program to demonstrate the code you want patented. That would raise the costs of submarine patenting, as you'd have to do more of the development gruntwork before you could sue the people who proved it was profitable. Plus, it'd return some of the spurs to innovation, as people could read the published patent and be able to put it to use easier. Personally, the other reform I'd favor (this also goes for copyright) is a very short period of monopoly, followed by a longer period of forced licensing. For 5 years, you can prevent anyone from using your idea. For 30 years after that, anyone who uses your idea must pay you royalties of x%, but you can't stop them from using your idea. After that, it's public domain.
Nevertheless, the colonists were feeding themselves within a couple years, and the only things they needed from the mother country were manufactured goods. Even then, basic things like axes and plows could be made right there. That's a far cry from a moon or mars base, where until greenhouse farming on a large scale could be set up, they'd be dependent on Earth for basically everything, and any sort of complex widget (the equivalent of axes and plows) would have to be shipped out, with the concomitant delays.
They also started paying off, or at least requiring no new huge investment, very quickly. Mars missions, on the other hand, will need to receive ever-increasing funding for long periods before they can even approach what the Jamestown settlers could do in 1609.
Supersadomasochisticnecrobestiality, it's when you get a hardon making Lassie a fatality!
On nbc.com, they use the commercials to cover the loading time. I.E, while the next 10 minutes loads completely enough to play through without stopping, they show a 30-second spot. I don't object, as the alternative is watching nothing while it loads or having the show stop partway through. Commercials like that do have a future.
For that matter, if they can do this, then why can't they do the same for spam?
3. Democrat or Republican?
As to feeds from content source, NBC.com has poor graphics quality but loads quickly (not a surprising tradeoff). Sometimes it hangs but I think that's my computer's fault--3-year-old laptop optimized for portability rather than power and not updated at all. The ads aren't terribly intrusive, and they appear to mask the loading time, so it's not like I could get the content any faster anyhow.
It's still a mark of how pathetic the Democrats are that they can't even bring themselves to take extremely popular measures. It's one thing to do whatever the polls say (both Clinton and the Republican Congress, 1994-2000), it's another to manipulate the public so the polls agree with what you want to do (Bush administration, 2001-2006), but those are understandable. The current Democrats are ignoring the polls in support of the policies of their enemies. I really don't understand it--after controlling Congress for 2 years, they're not going to be able to blame Bush for Iraq in 2008 if they don't lift a finger to get out of there.
It looks to me like they're taking incredibly stupid political advice from strategists who should be fired.
I think this is the future of content provision--over the internet, straight from the content companies' websites. Speed and quality will increase, the content companies will start charging on a pay-per-view or subscription basis for the good stuff/good quality, a large number of individual plans will proliferate, and the cable companies will be reduced to ISPs.
Actually, the Latin word for "man" is Vir, not Virus.
Since the Republicans made such a joke of the Clinton impeachment, any attempt to impeach Bush will be seen as partisan gamesmanship, even if it's justified. Plus, the Democrats are complete sissies, ninnies, pansies, and lots of other unflattering words ending in -ies. Witness their patheticness on Iraq. If they can't get together and demand what 70% of the country wants, what makes you think they'll take any political risks at all?
Obligatory: Girlfriend? This is slashdot!
Dell's never given me trouble with my extended warranty with them. I describe the symptoms, suffer through the pointless troubleshooting checklist, they send out a replacement part (and a tech if the part's hard to replace). My experience with Dell warranty support is enough to make me want to buy Dell again, which, considering how shitty their systems are, is indeed remarkable. But yes, I am a satisfied Dell customer.
The Poles, Czechs, and Hungarians would disagree with you, and be very happy about being able to. Russia's sphere of influence is about where it was in the late 1920s, a bit less in central asia.
And it's free, so I don't mind. They start charging for viewing off the website, their quality best shoot up like Isaac painting the future, or I'm gone. I don't even mind the ads, 'cause they keep it free.
I don't have a TV. I buy DVDs and watch shows online (currently going through Heroes on NBC.com). It's vastly superior, though the video quality on nbc.com sucks. I hope they're counting my hits and basing at least part of their business model on that.
If I read right, you have to click on a long link, whose destination is nonobvious, to activate this. That restricts this, like most other internet security threats, to the (multitudes of) total idiots. Am I reading TFA wrong?
It depends if the universe has a net neutrality policy.
"Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand, and I will---Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!"
That's 50.7% of those who voted, so about 50.7 million people. So 230 million either said no to Bush or didn't say anything.
Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, and the Conway Cabal would approve just fine.
Your point was so horribly overstated I must have walked right under it. E-mail addresses and names are so personal and private...if you're that worried, sign up for ITMS with a throwaway email address.