Nothing more, nothing less. Western Exceptionalists, try and explain why Syria was targeted before the Arab Spring, or why the United States continued to sell weapons to the dictatorship of Bahrain.
Because neocons use eternal warfare as a jobs creation program and an economic stimulous as long as it is other people's children who get to die.
You can copyright anything that you have created that has been recorded in some fashion, including a "string of words."
Let us put to the test. "Everybody loves Raymond" utilized dumfounded silence in many parts of the show, and that silence could often be quite hilarious. It's a joke.
So we have now gone from shows, to strings of words, to single sentences, to portions of sentences, and now silence is copyrightable.
Oh, and I'm putting all you bastards on notice that I went out and copyrighted "Copyright" as a joke this morning, and do not give anyone permission to use it. Cease and desist - you all have been warned.
Because you most certainly can. Stand-up comedians are professional joke-tellers who copyright their performances and sell them off to publisher like Netflix all the time. The entire joke/performance itself is the artist's property.
Sure, and the entire show is the comedian's property. That makes sense. But if we reduce it to the minimum, and if a joke is a copyrightable object, is a sentence within that joke copyrightable? A couple words?
A rabbi, a Priest, and an Irishman walk into a bar. While usually the first sentence of a line of jokes, I've heard people say only that sentence and people laugh. So it's now a joke, someone owns it, and it can't be used any more.
Even a non complete sentence "A rabbi and a Priest..... gets laughs. And who is to say that a joke has to be funny? A comedian could stand up and recite numbers. Andy Kaufman did a lot of weird stuff like that.
Seems like the portal to the humorless society - which some might like.
Because an alarming ecological story comes up, and without evidence or even a rational hypothetical cause, it's immediately blamed on climate change.
The article does not mention global warming or climate change at all. A much more likely culprit is Neonicotinoid pesticides. An interesting tidbit form the article is that they have been able to reconstruct some avian diets from the 40's round th etime DDT came into use. Possibly smoked the beetles pretty good, and after DDT was outlawed, thee beetles only made a small comeback.
electronic version of the ford versus Chevy argument
That's vi vs emacs, surely?
Yup. Some smart guy once told me that the closer the products, the greater the competition, Coke and Pesi like, Captain Picard versus Captain Kirk. And all of these are pretty close.
Legally they didn't steal anything. However as far as bragging rights go, they can sod right off. I'm sick of them and their fanbois claiming they invented the sun and moon and everything below them.
One thing I've learned fro 30 plus years of research is that there are no sudden breakthroughs. Everything is on a continuum. I've seen final implementations that came 50 years after the initial idea. Xerox had a GUI, and then Apple did. Apple's wasn't the first. Xerox wasn't the first. The closest we can get ot the first GUI is the oN-Line system which used a mouse and mutiple pages. Conceptualized in 1959, framed out in 1960, and fleshed out in the mid to late 60's. And that was largely based on Vannevar Bush's "Memex" information machine conceptualized in 1945.
Xerox PARC was a pretty innovative system, but it wasn't even a commercial system. I doubt that tiny at the time Apple forced giant Xerox to not manufacture commercial versions of the Xerox Star workstations.
So yeah, Apple didn't invent the GUI. Nor Xerox - and don't forget Silicon Graphics. Nor SRI. As for Vannevar Bush's 1945 Memex concept, I'll bet someone could find some obscure notebook reference by Nikola Tesla.
What Apple did was doing something with it. So did Silicon Graphics. So did Amiga, and even GEOs for Commodore 64 and some others. Eventually Microsoft did too.
Neither you nor I are responsible for what the "fanbois" on either side of this electronic version of the ford versus Chevy argument posit. The truth is out there.
What I'm saying is increasing the screen size isn't a new thing at all in general. Edge to edge folding over? samsung beat them (others have too). Until there're images of the phone no knows exactly what it will look like but I'd imagine just like an iphone with less bevel. Have you seen any of the tv ads for samsung edge 8? Apple doing it is completely different though, is that what you're saying? It's okay for apple to do it too, but they can't really pretend it's new or clever.
No, what I am saying is that there are implementation differences between What Apple patented and what Samsung is doing.
If I were to prognosticate, based on the sensors inplanted in the flexible portion of the screen, the possibility exists for a screen/rest of the phone one piece construction.
Can't say I care for that idea, but then again, a bezel-less phone is of no interest to me. It's still too damn small, and a practical smartphone always will be. Unless people start going for 10 inch tablet size smartphones.
What I just proved is that "-1, Troll" means "How dare you post a comment I don't like!"
Yup, some folks have a hard time understanding the truth about themselves.
The people who modded you down obviously never looked at the patent, and were almost certainly the same people who bragged about Samsung's bezel free stuff when Apple didn't.
Gawd, it's almost like the Youtube comment boards.
"Reducing the border area of a device." It describes how a mostly-flat display can have a curved border area allowing it to wrap around the sides of the device
Without having seen it doesn't that sound a lot like samsung's thing? I guess it's not copying when apple does it, its bravery.
So you are saying without seeing this thing that Apple is making a copy of Samsung's screen?
I guess that truthieness is alive and well. It sure seems like Apple would rip off Samsung because Apple Lisa and something something, so without me even looking, they obviously ripped off Samsung.
1) Did Apple apply for the patent before their rivals started doing it?
The bezel going to the edge is not the patent, it is the implementation. I think too many people think that
the image area going to the edge of the phone is what was patented. It is not.
2) Is the implementation they're patenting somehow different and novel, compared to what their rivals are doing?
Yup. I performed some Slashdot heresy, and looked up the patent. This is a phone front with some flexible curving side with sensors embedded in it. It is definitely different and novel.
As with most things in here, people who hate Apple will hate them getting a patent - or even existing for that matter. If Samsung had filed the same patent, they would be singing praises from the rafters.
Uh, the actual claim is correct. Apple DID see what Xerox did and DID rip it off.
They paid off some value, but the fact is Apple saw what Xerox did and ripped it off.
Let me get this straight. People come on and bitch about the patent system, then complain because the company they hate "ripped off" a graphical user interface, which means they support the patent system for patenting trivial things at the same time they hate the patent system for protecting trivial things.
It's not just you. The number of people becoming "car poor" is certainly on the rise. Longer term loans with higher interest rates but lower monthly payments, it's a booming sector.
Ugh. I simply don't get it. We need to implement money handling and financial health classes (as well as re-introduce Civics classes - but that's a different story) in school. Immediate gratification coupled with financial ignorance or even stupidity will cause these people to dig a hole for themselves that will take years to get out of - if ever.
The need for gap insurance is also increasing, that's where my company is making some money. As the saying goes, it can't go on forever.
I had to look up gap insurance. Holy crap! Wonder what these folk are going to do when they hit retirement age, because they aren't going to have any money to live on.
The top end for the poorest 51% of Americans might be $19k, but the cars bought by the other 49% are *WAY* more expensive in real life. SUVs *start* in the mid-20s, and quickly soar to 40k or more by the time you add the usual soccer-mom options.
Very true. That 19K figure, although I have no reason to question it's veracity, doesn't account for the many more vehicles that are much pricier. There simply aren't that many cars at that price point.
Poor Americans compensate by keeping them longer or buying used.
Not just poor. I buy 1 year, off - lease vehicles at a big savings, and keep them as long as they don't turn into a maintenance pain in the ass. Of course, its almost always cheaper to fix, but since I travel a lot, reliability is a big factor.
People buy things they can't afford all the time. it's called massive debt.
Yeah - I suspect that they are working a 10 year car loan, and making it bigger every time they trade for a new one. Amazing, my parents paid off their mortgage in ten years, and they had domething worth something at the end. These tools are just going further into debt, and end up with very little.
And then the reason that so many are not prepared for life after work becomes very clear. Otherwise it is beyond my comprehension.
is just another phone I'm not going to consider buying.
Great! that's the wonder of having choices. Some of us find the headphone jack the most important part of a phone. And a whole lot of us don't. Buy what you like.
If enough of you jackers vote with your wallets, they'll install a chip in your arm with a quarter inch jack when smartphones go to implants and retinal displays.
and the ability to comprehend it. Put another way, Libertarianism doesn't work with Health Care because unless you're a heart surgeon you can't judge the quality of your next bit of Open Heart Surgery until after it's done and you're dead or not dead.
I read one tome a long time ago by a Libertarian - I foget the name. But he argued for no certifications nor regulations, period. And he used a Doctor as an example. Paraphrasing a bit because it was long ago, but " If a person wants to call themselves a doctor, they have a right to, the only thing needed is that sign in front of their office. If they are a good doctor, they will be successful. If they kill enough people, they won't have any more patients. The free market always wins."
It was about that time I realized that ideology isn't always very intelligent. I mean yeah, he was right and all. Just a pity the Libertarian doctor had to kill hundreds of people so that others might want to avoid him.
The top end vehicle price for most Americans is currently $19K. That's pretty much the magic point. Maybe if you factor in gas savings they will be able to afford a bit more but not much.
Though in my neck of the woods, there are people driving around in huge 60K+ Pickups, and they certainly aren't making much more than the low 20K's per year. Dunno how they are doing it.
I don't even go to movies any more because there is no surprise.
This reminds me of our monthly management meetings. Attendance dwindled off, and during one meeting, the big guy asked what could be done to improve attendance. Most people had suggestions about how we could expand upon what we were doing, to implement the topics in more detail. People there nodded in approval.
Then a guy in the corner stood up and said - "We're losing attendance here, and you are asking how to improve attendance among the people who are left. How about asking the people who don't come to the meetings any more?"
Want to get people like me to be interested in movies again? Quit making movies like they are now.
He wanted to leave the 4xx ports open to the internet? I block them at Windows Firewall, or in Linux and Android, I refuse to even install SMB derived protocols (SFTP is good enough)
He's an idiot. "SMB is a cornerstone of industry and is constantly updated, and is not a security risk".
Except when it is, of course. Which is most of the time.
He really hated my citations. Whatever, he's an example of why this stuff happens. A supposed expert who makes things worse.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing more, nothing less. Western Exceptionalists, try and explain why Syria was targeted before the Arab Spring, or why the United States continued to sell weapons to the dictatorship of Bahrain.
Because neocons use eternal warfare as a jobs creation program and an economic stimulous as long as it is other people's children who get to die.
Copyright covers the exact representation. If somebody repeats your joke word for word, you may have a case.
How about in a different language?
You can copyright anything that you have created that has been recorded in some fashion, including a "string of words."
Let us put to the test. "Everybody loves Raymond" utilized dumfounded silence in many parts of the show, and that silence could often be quite hilarious. It's a joke.
So we have now gone from shows, to strings of words, to single sentences, to portions of sentences, and now silence is copyrightable.
Oh, and I'm putting all you bastards on notice that I went out and copyrighted "Copyright" as a joke this morning, and do not give anyone permission to use it. Cease and desist - you all have been warned.
Because you most certainly can. Stand-up comedians are professional joke-tellers who copyright their performances and sell them off to publisher like Netflix all the time. The entire joke/performance itself is the artist's property.
Sure, and the entire show is the comedian's property. That makes sense. But if we reduce it to the minimum, and if a joke is a copyrightable object, is a sentence within that joke copyrightable? A couple words?
A rabbi, a Priest, and an Irishman walk into a bar. While usually the first sentence of a line of jokes, I've heard people say only that sentence and people laugh. So it's now a joke, someone owns it, and it can't be used any more.
Even a non complete sentence "A rabbi and a Priest..... gets laughs. And who is to say that a joke has to be funny? A comedian could stand up and recite numbers. Andy Kaufman did a lot of weird stuff like that.
Seems like the portal to the humorless society - which some might like.
No problem. These are really big issues. If the food web is broken we are all in big trouble.
In so many ways. Wasn't there a story in here about tiny drones replacing bees to pollinate food? Hilarious.
Because an alarming ecological story comes up, and without evidence or even a rational hypothetical cause, it's immediately blamed on climate change.
The article does not mention global warming or climate change at all. A much more likely culprit is Neonicotinoid pesticides. An interesting tidbit form the article is that they have been able to reconstruct some avian diets from the 40's round th etime DDT came into use. Possibly smoked the beetles pretty good, and after DDT was outlawed, thee beetles only made a small comeback.
Amazing, my parents paid off their mortgage in ten years, and they had domething worth something at the end
Do-Meth-ing? Now I know how your parents afforded their 10-year mortgate, Mister White.
We were the prototype for Breaking Bad. 8^)
That's vi vs emacs, surely?
Yup. Some smart guy once told me that the closer the products, the greater the competition, Coke and Pesi like, Captain Picard versus Captain Kirk. And all of these are pretty close.
Gap insurance is relatively cheap, and will save your butt if your car isnt worth what you own on it and it gets totaled.
Even cheaper to pay cash for the car.
Legally they didn't steal anything. However as far as bragging rights go, they can sod right off. I'm sick of them and their fanbois claiming they invented the sun and moon and everything below them.
One thing I've learned fro 30 plus years of research is that there are no sudden breakthroughs. Everything is on a continuum. I've seen final implementations that came 50 years after the initial idea. Xerox had a GUI, and then Apple did. Apple's wasn't the first. Xerox wasn't the first. The closest we can get ot the first GUI is the oN-Line system which used a mouse and mutiple pages. Conceptualized in 1959, framed out in 1960, and fleshed out in the mid to late 60's. And that was largely based on Vannevar Bush's "Memex" information machine conceptualized in 1945.
Xerox PARC was a pretty innovative system, but it wasn't even a commercial system. I doubt that tiny at the time Apple forced giant Xerox to not manufacture commercial versions of the Xerox Star workstations.
So yeah, Apple didn't invent the GUI. Nor Xerox - and don't forget Silicon Graphics. Nor SRI. As for Vannevar Bush's 1945 Memex concept, I'll bet someone could find some obscure notebook reference by Nikola Tesla.
What Apple did was doing something with it. So did Silicon Graphics. So did Amiga, and even GEOs for Commodore 64 and some others. Eventually Microsoft did too.
Neither you nor I are responsible for what the "fanbois" on either side of this electronic version of the ford versus Chevy argument posit. The truth is out there.
What I'm saying is increasing the screen size isn't a new thing at all in general. Edge to edge folding over? samsung beat them (others have too). Until there're images of the phone no knows exactly what it will look like but I'd imagine just like an iphone with less bevel. Have you seen any of the tv ads for samsung edge 8? Apple doing it is completely different though, is that what you're saying? It's okay for apple to do it too, but they can't really pretend it's new or clever.
No, what I am saying is that there are implementation differences between What Apple patented and what Samsung is doing.
If I were to prognosticate, based on the sensors inplanted in the flexible portion of the screen, the possibility exists for a screen/rest of the phone one piece construction.
Can't say I care for that idea, but then again, a bezel-less phone is of no interest to me. It's still too damn small, and a practical smartphone always will be. Unless people start going for 10 inch tablet size smartphones.
What I just proved is that "-1, Troll" means "How dare you post a comment I don't like!"
Yup, some folks have a hard time understanding the truth about themselves.
The people who modded you down obviously never looked at the patent, and were almost certainly the same people who bragged about Samsung's bezel free stuff when Apple didn't.
Gawd, it's almost like the Youtube comment boards.
"Reducing the border area of a device." It describes how a mostly-flat display can have a curved border area allowing it to wrap around the sides of the device
Without having seen it doesn't that sound a lot like samsung's thing? I guess it's not copying when apple does it, its bravery.
So you are saying without seeing this thing that Apple is making a copy of Samsung's screen?
I guess that truthieness is alive and well. It sure seems like Apple would rip off Samsung because Apple Lisa and something something, so without me even looking, they obviously ripped off Samsung.
Sounds legit.
Come on man, you can do better than that.
Well there are two questions there:
1) Did Apple apply for the patent before their rivals started doing it?
The bezel going to the edge is not the patent, it is the implementation. I think too many people think that the image area going to the edge of the phone is what was patented. It is not.
2) Is the implementation they're patenting somehow different and novel, compared to what their rivals are doing?
Yup. I performed some Slashdot heresy, and looked up the patent. This is a phone front with some flexible curving side with sensors embedded in it. It is definitely different and novel.
As with most things in here, people who hate Apple will hate them getting a patent - or even existing for that matter. If Samsung had filed the same patent, they would be singing praises from the rafters.
Uh, the actual claim is correct. Apple DID see what Xerox did and DID rip it off.
They paid off some value, but the fact is Apple saw what Xerox did and ripped it off.
Let me get this straight. People come on and bitch about the patent system, then complain because the company they hate "ripped off" a graphical user interface, which means they support the patent system for patenting trivial things at the same time they hate the patent system for protecting trivial things.
The Red Queen applauds y'all.
Oh man... the US patent system is beyond broken and useless...
How dare it grant patents to a company you don't like!
Here we have a case of a +5 Insightful post sitting at 0 Troll and being punished by the people who are proving the poster's point.
It's not just you. The number of people becoming "car poor" is certainly on the rise. Longer term loans with higher interest rates but lower monthly payments, it's a booming sector.
Ugh. I simply don't get it. We need to implement money handling and financial health classes (as well as re-introduce Civics classes - but that's a different story) in school. Immediate gratification coupled with financial ignorance or even stupidity will cause these people to dig a hole for themselves that will take years to get out of - if ever.
The need for gap insurance is also increasing, that's where my company is making some money. As the saying goes, it can't go on forever.
I had to look up gap insurance. Holy crap! Wonder what these folk are going to do when they hit retirement age, because they aren't going to have any money to live on.
The top end for the poorest 51% of Americans might be $19k, but the cars bought by the other 49% are *WAY* more expensive in real life. SUVs *start* in the mid-20s, and quickly soar to 40k or more by the time you add the usual soccer-mom options.
Very true. That 19K figure, although I have no reason to question it's veracity, doesn't account for the many more vehicles that are much pricier. There simply aren't that many cars at that price point.
Poor Americans compensate by keeping them longer or buying used.
Not just poor. I buy 1 year, off - lease vehicles at a big savings, and keep them as long as they don't turn into a maintenance pain in the ass. Of course, its almost always cheaper to fix, but since I travel a lot, reliability is a big factor.
People buy things they can't afford all the time. it's called massive debt.
Yeah - I suspect that they are working a 10 year car loan, and making it bigger every time they trade for a new one. Amazing, my parents paid off their mortgage in ten years, and they had domething worth something at the end. These tools are just going further into debt, and end up with very little.
And then the reason that so many are not prepared for life after work becomes very clear. Otherwise it is beyond my comprehension.
is just another phone I'm not going to consider buying.
Great! that's the wonder of having choices. Some of us find the headphone jack the most important part of a phone. And a whole lot of us don't. Buy what you like.
If enough of you jackers vote with your wallets, they'll install a chip in your arm with a quarter inch jack when smartphones go to implants and retinal displays.
and the ability to comprehend it. Put another way, Libertarianism doesn't work with Health Care because unless you're a heart surgeon you can't judge the quality of your next bit of Open Heart Surgery until after it's done and you're dead or not dead.
I read one tome a long time ago by a Libertarian - I foget the name. But he argued for no certifications nor regulations, period. And he used a Doctor as an example. Paraphrasing a bit because it was long ago, but " If a person wants to call themselves a doctor, they have a right to, the only thing needed is that sign in front of their office. If they are a good doctor, they will be successful. If they kill enough people, they won't have any more patients. The free market always wins."
It was about that time I realized that ideology isn't always very intelligent. I mean yeah, he was right and all. Just a pity the Libertarian doctor had to kill hundreds of people so that others might want to avoid him.
The top end vehicle price for most Americans is currently $19K. That's pretty much the magic point. Maybe if you factor in gas savings they will be able to afford a bit more but not much.
Though in my neck of the woods, there are people driving around in huge 60K+ Pickups, and they certainly aren't making much more than the low 20K's per year. Dunno how they are doing it.
We all know this is insane. BeauHD's playing a game to see how many /.'ers will spend time tying to refute a preposterous article.
cf. https://xkcd.com/386/
We're all going to be dead in 3 years, so the article is kinda right.
For the wrong reason tho'
I don't even go to movies any more because there is no surprise.
This reminds me of our monthly management meetings. Attendance dwindled off, and during one meeting, the big guy asked what could be done to improve attendance. Most people had suggestions about how we could expand upon what we were doing, to implement the topics in more detail. People there nodded in approval.
Then a guy in the corner stood up and said - "We're losing attendance here, and you are asking how to improve attendance among the people who are left. How about asking the people who don't come to the meetings any more?"
Want to get people like me to be interested in movies again? Quit making movies like they are now.
He wanted to leave the 4xx ports open to the internet? I block them at Windows Firewall, or in Linux and Android, I refuse to even install SMB derived protocols (SFTP is good enough)
He's an idiot. "SMB is a cornerstone of industry and is constantly updated, and is not a security risk".
Except when it is, of course. Which is most of the time.
He really hated my citations. Whatever, he's an example of why this stuff happens. A supposed expert who makes things worse.