Why do you consider your opinion relevant? The current patent system presupposes that legitimacy can be objectively determinable by lawyers following a set of rules after all.
Only fast reactors can get reasonable burn rates... MOX is a dangerous scam, fuel is only reprocessed once and hardly impacts waste at all.
Unfortunately fast reactors currently do not quite have the safety record of water moderated reactors... it's certainly an avenue to explore, but don't hold your breath. Maybe liquid sodium or molten salt reactors can be made to work well, or maybe the percentage of Monju's will be entirely unacceptable.
Dunno if that level of self motivation is necessary a good thing for a large company, for which it's impossible to really bind employees emotionally... seems to me self motivated people will also be more motivated to search out opportunities and jump ship faster.
If you make the radiator hot enough it can dissipate whatever wattage you want... that said, there might be some practical problems with that.
If cooling the system at peak power consumption isn't an option you might be able to store the gaseous helium for a while in a balloon before cooling. So at the start you just vent like they did now, once the helium almost runs out you go into a low duty cycle operation where you dump expanded helium in the balloon during operation and then slowly recover it... this way the cooling system can work at much lower wattage.
It is pretty much 100% certain at this point that THz radiation can selectively activate genes... it interacts with DNA. Whether there are carcinogenic effects is a bit contested, but the gene activation in and of itself is scary enough to wait a little fucking longer before we make all the airline passengers (except VIPs I'm sure) guinea pigs.
Almost certainly it's a revolving door type of process rather than outright bribery... ie. you need a firm with lots of ex USPTO staff with inside connections (waiting for their chance to hit the revolving door).
YOU could, whether future generations could is an open question... the ability of capitalism to avoid wealth concentration in the absence of redistribution is an open question (obviously crony capitalism is even better at wealth concentration, but that's a different matter... you can have relatively large government without crony capitalism, see Sweden for instance, or even Switzerland which is a whole lot more socialist than most libertarians pretend).
In the end feudalism is perfectly compatible with anarcho-capitalism... it just requires a "King" who owns a lot of land.
There is nothing wrong with entrepreneurial networking, the problem is that the top is littered with networks of little better than confidence men looking for fellow sociopaths to sell their cons... and as the article shows, the very very top is by far the worst.
First of all the Groklaw statement you quoted was clearly opinion, it wasn't presented as interpretation of the court ruling at all. Also you're entirely wrong any way.
Part of the ruling quoted by Groklaw :
“[I]nventions with specific applications or improvements to technologies in the marketplace [may not] be so abstract that they override the statutory language and framework of the Patent Act.” Research Corp., 627 F.3d at 869. However, according to the patent itself, the claims’ novelty and improvement over the standard is the rounding of the floating-point number before, rather than after, the arithmetic computation. ‘697 Patent Col. 4:32–48. So, as in Flook, Claim 1 merely constitutes an improvement on the known method for processing floating-point numbers. Id. at 595 n.18. Claim 1, then, is merely an improvement on a mathematical formula. Even when tied to computing, since floating-point numbers are a computerized numeric format, the conversion of floating-point numbers has applications across fields as diverse as science, math, communications, security, graphics, and games. Thus, a patent on Claim 1 would cover vast end uses, impeding the onward march of science. Benson, 409 U.S. at 68. Under Flook, the improvement over the standard is insufficient to validate Claim 1’s otherwise unpatentable subject matter."
So novelty and non obviousness were ruled on by the court... that's what Flook is all about.
I think Apple is being the innovative one here, innovatively anticompetitive... and I agree with Apple, they are abiding by the letter of the law.
The question is do we want all major manufacturers with some decent pull (ie. Samsung) to start doing this as well... I think we don't, allowing market incumbents to throw up extra barriers of entry through contracts only benefits the market incumbents. So lets update the laws to make what Apple is doing illegal going forward.
Immigrants... of course immigrants are completely fucking irrelevant to the story.
These companies aren't screaming to make it easier to immigrate... they want more visas (ie. people forever on the edge of being deported if they lose their job).
Accomodation-vergence mismatch is an overstated problem for the majority of the population... sucks if you are part of the minority of course, but meh... not my problem.
You can get used to a lot of things, half the time in house I don't wear my glasses, half the time I do... my brain is already used to two sets of accommodation and vergence matching functions, it can handle one more.
The MPEG-LA license pools don't offer non-standard restricted licenses... Google being a licensor for say the AVC pool wouldn't give them any rights for VP8.
It legitimizes the patents in question and if I want to abide by the license I have to use them ONLY to implement VP8, not a fork of VP8 which doesn't obey the VP8 specification... score one for collaboration with the enemy.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do you consider your opinion relevant? The current patent system presupposes that legitimacy can be objectively determinable by lawyers following a set of rules after all.
What rare earth metal is used in traditional Poly-Si solar cells?
Only fast reactors can get reasonable burn rates ... MOX is a dangerous scam, fuel is only reprocessed once and hardly impacts waste at all.
Unfortunately fast reactors currently do not quite have the safety record of water moderated reactors ... it's certainly an avenue to explore, but don't hold your breath. Maybe liquid sodium or molten salt reactors can be made to work well, or maybe the percentage of Monju's will be entirely unacceptable.
They already have huge losses from skimming to make them care about security, it was probably an inside job ... they usually are.
Dunno if that level of self motivation is necessary a good thing for a large company, for which it's impossible to really bind employees emotionally ... seems to me self motivated people will also be more motivated to search out opportunities and jump ship faster.
If you make the radiator hot enough it can dissipate whatever wattage you want ... that said, there might be some practical problems with that.
If cooling the system at peak power consumption isn't an option you might be able to store the gaseous helium for a while in a balloon before cooling. So at the start you just vent like they did now, once the helium almost runs out you go into a low duty cycle operation where you dump expanded helium in the balloon during operation and then slowly recover it ... this way the cooling system can work at much lower wattage.
It is pretty much 100% certain at this point that THz radiation can selectively activate genes ... it interacts with DNA. Whether there are carcinogenic effects is a bit contested, but the gene activation in and of itself is scary enough to wait a little fucking longer before we make all the airline passengers (except VIPs I'm sure) guinea pigs.
You clearly don't have enough confidence in your short term ability to avoid tail risk to convert in long term magical driving abilities.
Ditching design, software and method patents entirely would be a good start ... nothing good has ever come out of their protection.
Almost certainly it's a revolving door type of process rather than outright bribery ... ie. you need a firm with lots of ex USPTO staff with inside connections (waiting for their chance to hit the revolving door).
YOU could, whether future generations could is an open question ... the ability of capitalism to avoid wealth concentration in the absence of redistribution is an open question (obviously crony capitalism is even better at wealth concentration, but that's a different matter ... you can have relatively large government without crony capitalism, see Sweden for instance, or even Switzerland which is a whole lot more socialist than most libertarians pretend).
In the end feudalism is perfectly compatible with anarcho-capitalism ... it just requires a "King" who owns a lot of land.
An AC above posted a nice story ...
http://exiledonline.com/failing-up-with-citigroups-dick-parsons/
There is nothing wrong with entrepreneurial networking, the problem is that the top is littered with networks of little better than confidence men looking for fellow sociopaths to sell their cons ... and as the article shows, the very very top is by far the worst.
First of all the Groklaw statement you quoted was clearly opinion, it wasn't presented as interpretation of the court ruling at all. Also you're entirely wrong any way.
Part of the ruling quoted by Groklaw :
“[I]nventions with specific applications or improvements to technologies in the marketplace [may not] be so abstract that they override the statutory language and framework of the Patent Act.” Research Corp., 627 F.3d at 869. However, according to the patent itself, the claims’ novelty and improvement over the standard is the rounding of the floating-point number before, rather than after, the arithmetic computation. ‘697 Patent Col. 4:32–48. So, as in Flook, Claim 1 merely constitutes an improvement on the known method for processing floating-point numbers. Id. at 595 n.18. Claim 1, then, is merely an improvement on a mathematical formula. Even when tied to computing, since floating-point numbers are a computerized numeric format, the conversion of floating-point numbers has applications across fields as diverse as science, math, communications, security, graphics, and games. Thus, a patent on Claim 1 would cover vast end uses, impeding the onward march of science. Benson, 409 U.S. at 68. Under Flook, the improvement over the standard is insufficient to validate Claim 1’s otherwise unpatentable subject matter."
So novelty and non obviousness were ruled on by the court ... that's what Flook is all about.
Two wrongs make a right?
Also one of the most heavily regulated to enforce competition, especially in the EU.
They know anticompetitive behaviour when they see it.
I think Apple is being the innovative one here, innovatively anticompetitive ... and I agree with Apple, they are abiding by the letter of the law.
The question is do we want all major manufacturers with some decent pull (ie. Samsung) to start doing this as well ... I think we don't, allowing market incumbents to throw up extra barriers of entry through contracts only benefits the market incumbents. So lets update the laws to make what Apple is doing illegal going forward.
Immigrants ... of course immigrants are completely fucking irrelevant to the story.
These companies aren't screaming to make it easier to immigrate ... they want more visas (ie. people forever on the edge of being deported if they lose their job).
It could be a bug in the overdrive system, which can carry over state between frames inside the hardware.
That's not on a 457 visa though ... generally if you bring enough money you can immigrate anywhere.
Messages are mixed, the rumour mill is convinced it's going to be AMD ... but there are few credible sources.
Accomodation-vergence mismatch is an overstated problem for the majority of the population ... sucks if you are part of the minority of course, but meh ... not my problem.
You can get used to a lot of things, half the time in house I don't wear my glasses, half the time I do ... my brain is already used to two sets of accommodation and vergence matching functions, it can handle one more.
The MPEG-LA license pools don't offer non-standard restricted licenses ... Google being a licensor for say the AVC pool wouldn't give them any rights for VP8.
ISO/MPEG has a huge problem with NIH syndrome ... every time they are involved with video standards lately they just make it worse.
H.263+ was better than MPEG4, H.264 was better before MPEG involvement ... they have the reverse midas touch.
It legitimizes the patents in question and if I want to abide by the license I have to use them ONLY to implement VP8, not a fork of VP8 which doesn't obey the VP8 specification ... score one for collaboration with the enemy.
Would you say that you would cost more or less to hire than an equally knowledgeable Linux developer for consulting services?