I personally have nothing against first-to-file as long as espionage and "invention kidnapping" are sternly punished.
Since patents are granted by the government, rather than inherently possessed by the government, it is entirely appropriate for patents to be granted on terms that are convenient for the government.
Also, an official filing date is much easier to track and sort rather than a nebulous, hard to prove date of invention.
What might be a good compromise is to give entities that file relatively simultaneously joint rights in the same patent.
Prior art's effect on patents should be as follows:
If the applying entity can be proven to know about the prior art before they applied for it, they should be sanctioned for knowingly filing a frivolous patent.
If the patent office grants a bad patent, then the patent office didn't do its job right and should both refund the applicant's fees, as well as reimburse them for any damages the applicant suffers as a result of his patent being borked.
All parties, be they patent office, applicant, or defendant in an infringement suit, are all responsible not to wilfully ignore tal information regarding patents. Anyone who does so loses the benefit of being reimbursed for mistakes on the part of the patent office, or anyone else.
Which is the same argument I was making for the PS3.
If I own the box, then why the hell should there be a god-damned hypervisor explicitly designed to lock me out of my own hardware unless I use only sony approved software? This is sony trying to tell me how to use my own stuff.
People love to cheat, steal, and murder. It's only because of police that it doesn't happen rampantly, but in cyberspace where you can get away with it, it is very common. When the cat is away, the mice will play.
The RIAA is fighting against a buch of asshole pirates that really don't give a damn about copyright (never will either). The problem is that the RIAA is mistargeting innocent bystanders and bringing down a flood of wrath from the people who actually WOULD have scruples, thus causing people to pirate out of spite. If the RIAA had perfect aim and only took out pirates that it could prove were pirates, they'd have a lot more sympathy.
The RIAA needs to yield to the lawlessness of cyberspace, tighten up its litigation and go after real pirates without being complete clusterfucks with the evidence, and start hitting targets that count. I.e., real pirates.
Piracy is wrong, but so is how the RIAA goes about doing things.
Congress has the power to obstruct everything obama tries to do. Just like Gowron trying to force Martok into no-win battles, Congress can make obama look bad pretty easily.
If he's smart, he'll call for america's support and ask them to pressure their reps in congress not to stonewall him. Then, if his programs don't go through, he can blame congress for sticking a big fat foot in the way and tripping him up.
And how exactly is this going to work unless the feds get off their butts and de-schedule marijuana?
Oh wait...
Funny thing, since pot is banned, wouldn't that make any scientific studies of it illegal as well?
Ok, someone start a double-blind study of it outside the states or somewhere where it's legal, then publish the results here and use that to pound the feds.
I don't like experiments here, all that does is give the DEA something to pound.
Windows Autoplay was a major aggravating factor in that case.
Since you can't trust everything that's on a removable storage device, ESPECIALLY one that's rewritable, automatically executing it is just plain stupid.
You wouldn't execute a random binary you downloaded off the web, so why should your computer simply autoplay a random-ass flash drive?
If the machines were preinstalled with a configuration that the hardware couldn't sustain, I'd consider that a breach of warranty.
Otherwise, the relation between what MS demoed for vista, and what was actually possible, may depend on if MS provided adequate disclaimers (that fine print crap at the bottom of the screen).
However this trial goes, I hope (likely in vain) that science and logic dominate the evidence, the arguments, and the presentations.
MS isn't going to be liable until they are, either by law or contract, obliged to third parties not to make an infectable OS.
I'd like resilience to viruses be a required safety feature, much like guards are in heavy machinery, and I would also like lack of said resilience be a case of product liability.
Given how deep MS probably is in the pockets of congressmen, I doubt they'll get any such standard laid upon them.
If the teacher has the power (notice I didn't say right) to impose punishments or get you suspended/detention for insubordination, are you still a fool to not resist?
In all likelihood, resistance may be futile in this case, especially if the teacher has the support of administration and the school has the right to confiscate the notes as contraband. If that's the case, you're effectively screwed because any resistance at that point will likely be futile and only get you in trouble real fast.
Consider also that it's his word against his teacher.
Standing up for your rights is a good thing, but it's useless getting your ass kicked defending "rights" that you are going to lose anyway, unless you're willing to let your own rights loss serve as a bit of martyrdome for someone else, who has to let lady luck smile by actually giving a rip about it anyway.
Might doesn't make right, but it sure as hell makes power in spite of right.
The problem with UAC is that programs that need admin privileges are so rampant that malware attempting to exploit it simply gets lost in the noise.
In other words, Microsoft was *gasp* right for once.
I applaud them for putting in UAC, and shame on the vendors for trying to grab more privileges than they need. Seriously, what kind of app (unless it's administrative in nature) needs a friggin admin privilege to do shit?
Here in washington state, we have initiatives. I must say that our initiatives aren't even half as asshatted as some of the laws that have been passed.
Case in point:
Initiative outlawing smoking vs. making it a criminal offense to be a member of the communist party.
Slashdot Mirror
I personally have nothing against first-to-file as long as espionage and "invention kidnapping" are sternly punished.
Since patents are granted by the government, rather than inherently possessed by the government, it is entirely appropriate for patents to be granted on terms that are convenient for the government.
Also, an official filing date is much easier to track and sort rather than a nebulous, hard to prove date of invention.
What might be a good compromise is to give entities that file relatively simultaneously joint rights in the same patent.
Prior art's effect on patents should be as follows:
If the applying entity can be proven to know about the prior art before they applied for it, they should be sanctioned for knowingly filing a frivolous patent.
If the patent office grants a bad patent, then the patent office didn't do its job right and should both refund the applicant's fees, as well as reimburse them for any damages the applicant suffers as a result of his patent being borked.
All parties, be they patent office, applicant, or defendant in an infringement suit, are all responsible not to wilfully ignore tal information regarding patents. Anyone who does so loses the benefit of being reimbursed for mistakes on the part of the patent office, or anyone else.
Likely there would be a failure of consideration and the patent license would turn effectively into a consulting.
However, getting the companies to actually cough up refunds? If it gets ugly they'll shift resources out of the country first.
If that would give chinese authorities jurisdiction over US citizens making statements on US soil, that will suck.
GM wouldn't get laughed at if they actually had enough market power to make it happen.
The problem with this car analogy is that it doesn't follow. Cars have standardized parts, printers don't.
Which is the same argument I was making for the PS3.
If I own the box, then why the hell should there be a god-damned hypervisor explicitly designed to lock me out of my own hardware unless I use only sony approved software? This is sony trying to tell me how to use my own stuff.
Dunno, but this sounds like DRM to me.
The problem is human nature.
People love to cheat, steal, and murder. It's only because of police that it doesn't happen rampantly, but in cyberspace where you can get away with it, it is very common. When the cat is away, the mice will play.
The RIAA is fighting against a buch of asshole pirates that really don't give a damn about copyright (never will either). The problem is that the RIAA is mistargeting innocent bystanders and bringing down a flood of wrath from the people who actually WOULD have scruples, thus causing people to pirate out of spite. If the RIAA had perfect aim and only took out pirates that it could prove were pirates, they'd have a lot more sympathy.
The RIAA needs to yield to the lawlessness of cyberspace, tighten up its litigation and go after real pirates without being complete clusterfucks with the evidence, and start hitting targets that count. I.e., real pirates.
Piracy is wrong, but so is how the RIAA goes about doing things.
Congress has the power to obstruct everything obama tries to do. Just like Gowron trying to force Martok into no-win battles, Congress can make obama look bad pretty easily.
If he's smart, he'll call for america's support and ask them to pressure their reps in congress not to stonewall him. Then, if his programs don't go through, he can blame congress for sticking a big fat foot in the way and tripping him up.
MS can bundle all they like.
It's when they start giving their own browser preferential treatment that we quite rightly cry foul.
This is the very essence of product tying.
Using market power in the tying product (MS Windows), to restrain competition in the tied product's market (IE, browsers).
Having the government do your dirty anticompetitive work for you is a good thing...for you.
And how exactly is this going to work unless the feds get off their butts and de-schedule marijuana?
Oh wait...
Funny thing, since pot is banned, wouldn't that make any scientific studies of it illegal as well?
Ok, someone start a double-blind study of it outside the states or somewhere where it's legal, then publish the results here and use that to pound the feds.
I don't like experiments here, all that does is give the DEA something to pound.
Windows Autoplay was a major aggravating factor in that case.
Since you can't trust everything that's on a removable storage device, ESPECIALLY one that's rewritable, automatically executing it is just plain stupid.
You wouldn't execute a random binary you downloaded off the web, so why should your computer simply autoplay a random-ass flash drive?
And what's going to happen to those DRM'ed songs once microsoft pulls the plug on the auth servers?
curry fried anus?
I'll bet there's some odd village out there that considers that a delicacy...
Maybe somewhere in Spain...I think they already fry bull balls after a bullfight.
Who wants to bet that the Zune authorization servers are going to get their plugs pulled?
It depends.
If the machines were preinstalled with a configuration that the hardware couldn't sustain, I'd consider that a breach of warranty.
Otherwise, the relation between what MS demoed for vista, and what was actually possible, may depend on if MS provided adequate disclaimers (that fine print crap at the bottom of the screen).
However this trial goes, I hope (likely in vain) that science and logic dominate the evidence, the arguments, and the presentations.
MS isn't going to be liable until they are, either by law or contract, obliged to third parties not to make an infectable OS.
I'd like resilience to viruses be a required safety feature, much like guards are in heavy machinery, and I would also like lack of said resilience be a case of product liability.
Given how deep MS probably is in the pockets of congressmen, I doubt they'll get any such standard laid upon them.
He was making a joke you insensitive clod!
What if "your" cellphone was actually loaned to you by your parents?
Wouldn't that then make the school guilty of larceny if they kept it? Or worse, strong-arm robbery if they forcibly took it from you?
If the teacher has the power (notice I didn't say right) to impose punishments or get you suspended/detention for insubordination, are you still a fool to not resist?
In all likelihood, resistance may be futile in this case, especially if the teacher has the support of administration and the school has the right to confiscate the notes as contraband. If that's the case, you're effectively screwed because any resistance at that point will likely be futile and only get you in trouble real fast.
Consider also that it's his word against his teacher.
Standing up for your rights is a good thing, but it's useless getting your ass kicked defending "rights" that you are going to lose anyway, unless you're willing to let your own rights loss serve as a bit of martyrdome for someone else, who has to let lady luck smile by actually giving a rip about it anyway.
Might doesn't make right, but it sure as hell makes power in spite of right.
I doubt it.
GoDaddy was the one that caved to the kentucky gambling site seizure while NS had balls enough to say no.
Unless you take all of your measurements on the same day of the year, accumulated errors due to rounding might actually make 2 + 2 = 5 or something.
Considering someone already proved "linux will do anything except make coffee" wrong, I wouldn't be surprised if someone actually tried that.
The problem with UAC is that programs that need admin privileges are so rampant that malware attempting to exploit it simply gets lost in the noise.
In other words, Microsoft was *gasp* right for once.
I applaud them for putting in UAC, and shame on the vendors for trying to grab more privileges than they need. Seriously, what kind of app (unless it's administrative in nature) needs a friggin admin privilege to do shit?
I'd bet half the time it isn't even needed.
"Wait -- then they'd never make any laws..."
And I say that's a good thing.
Here in washington state, we have initiatives. I must say that our initiatives aren't even half as asshatted as some of the laws that have been passed.
Case in point:
Initiative outlawing smoking vs. making it a criminal offense to be a member of the communist party.