This is not a Slashdot-friendly sentiment, and I'm feeling dirty for just suggesting it, but why isn't a patent troll entitled to patent enforcement? The original patent filer sold it. They got compensated. Why is it better if the original patent holder sues another company rather than they sell it to someone else, and that person/company does the suing? The original filer sold the patent and received the value of it, including the value of settlements if another company infringed.
You fucking moron don't you understand the problem goes way beyond Google?
Google is not going to care overly what problems go on beyond Google. You can yammer on about common public spaces, but if a private entity doesn't want to host content, forcing them to would be a great violation of their rights -- certainly a greater rights violation than that of the blogs losing their home.
For each footstep we go back we will never recover from.
I think we've seen, over and over again throughout history, that that is not the case. Humanity will recover, there is nothing that can irreversibly throw it into the Dark Ages.
Google has ignored that line the minute they became a publicly traded company.
Which rises some interesting questions about the true nature of the stock market.
The stock market is interested in success, nothing more, nothing less. Your definition and my definition of a "good company" might include something about social responsibility or not committing evil actions, but the stock market is in favor of those only so far as it doesn't threaten earnings, as most investors are not interested in the company or its employees or the stories behind them. Those companies are investments to them and are treated as such.
Non-shareholders have no stake, and the company is not set up to benefit them. The company won't try to harm them... as long as doing so does not harm the bottom line of the only people who matter -- the shareholders (and regulators... and law enforcement, the only folks who make the system not entirely Darwinian).
It's not a horrible movie, but top 25 all time as votes by IMDB users? That's a total joke
That's not unusual, the top 25 is often skewed by very recent releases. By default, it should probably edit out any film released in the last year; over time, the rankings get more accurate, while shortly after release it's skewed by fan boy votes.
It's funny to joke about, but I think the concept of them only allowing it to be serviced at Apple-certified garages would be quite high
Pretty much all modern cars work that way already. To do any real work inside the car, you need access to the electronic system which is only accessible through special machines controlled by the manufacturer. The amount of work that independent mechanics can accomplish without becoming manufacturer-certified is pretty slim.
I can see it now - It comes in only white and silver, the hood doesn't open
Oh, the hood opens... to reveal another hood that doesn't. Or more accurately, it would feature a flat metallic mass that you can't really do anything with (like a "black box"). Which is pretty much how modern cars work where it's expected the user will not do any maintenance beyond changing the oil and inflating the tires.
If I sign a contract that says "don't reveal what you saw here" as a stipulation of getting a tour of some restricted area (say, a movie studio), then I post on my blog everything that I saw, yes I'm legally liable. Probably not criminally liable, but those are two different things.
If they'd cut 30 minutes off of it, at least one could not have accused it of being overly long.
I'd like them to cut out the entire section of the movie with Matt Damon. He's given the worst, eye-rolling pop psychobabble dialog and doesn't really do anything than show why his planet was uninhabitable and break their space ship.
Kip Thorne was used for nothing more than propaganda - hey look we have a Physicist on staff. He's not the end all be all of Physics. A wormhole by Saturn - really Kip? Because that's a natural spot for one, unlike say, the center of the Galaxy! You know where a black holes might be found - where one might turn out be a worm hole!
Did you watch the movie? If you did, it sounds like you missed the ending, where they figured out the wormhole was made by future-humans to create a time paradox that saves current Earth.
You're not only trolling, but you're factually wrong, too. Matthew McConaughey's character is the clear hero of the film. He gets some help from Anne Hathaway's character, who is the one woman in the team of 6(?) on the exploration team.
SPOILER ahead.
Maybe you're referring to his daughter, Murph, but she spends 3/4 of the film doing nothing but sulking, and in the end her "revelations" were all orchestrated by McConaughey anyway.
I'm not sure, book 10 (Crossroads of Twilight) showed the same total lack of plot development that characterized books 6-8. However, book 11 was fairly unusual as the plot moves along at a good pace (instead of just at the beginning and end of the book, a problem most of the series entries had). Book 11 was when I noticed a change, and I assumed at the time that Jordan realized he was in book 11 of a 12-book series and needed to start wrapping things up.
Even if I used every volume of A Song of Ice and Fire, all of the Calendars, Atlases and Graphic Novels, I still couldn't prop up this desk nearly high enough to reach the window. Wheel of Time can do all that and still leave me with two extra books to straighten out the chair.
If sheer word count is the only qualifier, then yes, Wheel of Time would come out on top!
When a serious adaptation of Wheel of Time gets made, I hope they hire quality writers, as well as the strong, forceful editor that Jordan needed and never had.
The ones who have sometimes been found to not be nearly as impartial as they'd like you to believe?
You're not going to get perfection no matter which choice you pick. A combination of sources is probably best, but I'll generally take the possibly partial reviewer with a professional reputation to maintain over the yelp entry, which I know for sure is not impartial.
Slashdot Mirror
VERY different from a Patent Troll scenario;
This is not a Slashdot-friendly sentiment, and I'm feeling dirty for just suggesting it, but why isn't a patent troll entitled to patent enforcement? The original patent filer sold it. They got compensated. Why is it better if the original patent holder sues another company rather than they sell it to someone else, and that person/company does the suing? The original filer sold the patent and received the value of it, including the value of settlements if another company infringed.
you brainless twatwaffle
It's unfair that this was nominated down. I love insults that are totally nonsensical, yet brilliant.
You fucking moron don't you understand the problem goes way beyond Google?
Google is not going to care overly what problems go on beyond Google. You can yammer on about common public spaces, but if a private entity doesn't want to host content, forcing them to would be a great violation of their rights -- certainly a greater rights violation than that of the blogs losing their home.
For each footstep we go back we will never recover from.
I think we've seen, over and over again throughout history, that that is not the case. Humanity will recover, there is nothing that can irreversibly throw it into the Dark Ages.
Google has ignored that line the minute they became a publicly traded company.
Which rises some interesting questions about the true nature of the stock market.
The stock market is interested in success, nothing more, nothing less. Your definition and my definition of a "good company" might include something about social responsibility or not committing evil actions, but the stock market is in favor of those only so far as it doesn't threaten earnings, as most investors are not interested in the company or its employees or the stories behind them. Those companies are investments to them and are treated as such.
Non-shareholders have no stake, and the company is not set up to benefit them. The company won't try to harm them... as long as doing so does not harm the bottom line of the only people who matter -- the shareholders (and regulators... and law enforcement, the only folks who make the system not entirely Darwinian).
It's not a horrible movie, but top 25 all time as votes by IMDB users? That's a total joke
That's not unusual, the top 25 is often skewed by very recent releases. By default, it should probably edit out any film released in the last year; over time, the rankings get more accurate, while shortly after release it's skewed by fan boy votes.
"Reasonable prices" has never really been an Apple selling point.
It's funny to joke about, but I think the concept of them only allowing it to be serviced at Apple-certified garages would be quite high
Pretty much all modern cars work that way already. To do any real work inside the car, you need access to the electronic system which is only accessible through special machines controlled by the manufacturer. The amount of work that independent mechanics can accomplish without becoming manufacturer-certified is pretty slim.
I can see it now - It comes in only white and silver, the hood doesn't open
Oh, the hood opens... to reveal another hood that doesn't. Or more accurately, it would feature a flat metallic mass that you can't really do anything with (like a "black box"). Which is pretty much how modern cars work where it's expected the user will not do any maintenance beyond changing the oil and inflating the tires.
Also, non-compete agreements are not valid in California. Even out-of-state NCAs are invalidated if the employee is to work at a CA company
But isn't the employee still bound to the contract he signed in Massachusetts? California can't invalidate other states' contract laws.
And anyway, you can't sign away your civil rights
You absolutely can sign away certain rights.
If I sign a contract that says "don't reveal what you saw here" as a stipulation of getting a tour of some restricted area (say, a movie studio), then I post on my blog everything that I saw, yes I'm legally liable. Probably not criminally liable, but those are two different things.
Whenever something bad happens, there's usually a lawyer close by. You do the math.
You mean smart people almost always consult experts?
If they'd cut 30 minutes off of it, at least one could not have accused it of being overly long.
I'd like them to cut out the entire section of the movie with Matt Damon. He's given the worst, eye-rolling pop psychobabble dialog and doesn't really do anything than show why his planet was uninhabitable and break their space ship.
Kip Thorne was used for nothing more than propaganda - hey look we have a Physicist on staff. He's not the end all be all of Physics. A wormhole by Saturn - really Kip? Because that's a natural spot for one, unlike say, the center of the Galaxy! You know where a black holes might be found - where one might turn out be a worm hole!
Did you watch the movie? If you did, it sounds like you missed the ending, where they figured out the wormhole was made by future-humans to create a time paradox that saves current Earth.
You're not only trolling, but you're factually wrong, too. Matthew McConaughey's character is the clear hero of the film. He gets some help from Anne Hathaway's character, who is the one woman in the team of 6(?) on the exploration team.
SPOILER ahead.
Maybe you're referring to his daughter, Murph, but she spends 3/4 of the film doing nothing but sulking, and in the end her "revelations" were all orchestrated by McConaughey anyway.
You're making a flimsy assumption that there is valuable content on the web.
Given the number of people who do it over other activities, that's a pretty easy assumption to make.
Who the fuck creates a new account when they change employers?
People who don't like getting sued if they talk about their old employer.
If you really want to swear, you say blood twice, not once. That's much worse.
I'm not sure, book 10 (Crossroads of Twilight) showed the same total lack of plot development that characterized books 6-8. However, book 11 was fairly unusual as the plot moves along at a good pace (instead of just at the beginning and end of the book, a problem most of the series entries had). Book 11 was when I noticed a change, and I assumed at the time that Jordan realized he was in book 11 of a 12-book series and needed to start wrapping things up.
Did he say anything incorrect?
The heck you can't.
Even if I used every volume of A Song of Ice and Fire, all of the Calendars, Atlases and Graphic Novels, I still couldn't prop up this desk nearly high enough to reach the window. Wheel of Time can do all that and still leave me with two extra books to straighten out the chair.
If sheer word count is the only qualifier, then yes, Wheel of Time would come out on top!
When a serious adaptation of Wheel of Time gets made, I hope they hire quality writers, as well as the strong, forceful editor that Jordan needed and never had.
The ones who have sometimes been found to not be nearly as impartial as they'd like you to believe?
You're not going to get perfection no matter which choice you pick. A combination of sources is probably best, but I'll generally take the possibly partial reviewer with a professional reputation to maintain over the yelp entry, which I know for sure is not impartial.
As opposed to.... what? MPAA rating?
As opposed to restaurant reviews from professional reviewers.
Good news! I saw a news report that Jetpacks are here!
I want a future that is better, not fussier. Bells and whistles that add overhead without actually saving time don't seem like a win to me.