Taking something we already did without computers, and making a program that automates it should not be grounds for copyright.
Uhh...you kind of swapped language. Definitely still grounds for copyright, not patent.
"X...but on a computer" should not be patentable unless X is also novel.
Secondly, a fully working codebase should be submitted with the patent application such that, when the patent is expired, we actually have a record as to how the patented software was actually implemented. You shouldn't just be able to describe what the software does to be awarded a patent. A fully working code base must be presented so that the patent office can determine that you've actually done something novel and that you've actually made software that does what you say it does.
The code would still be protected by copyright - and any implementation based on viewing the source code could be fought as a derivative work (see: Wine project). Knowing whether you've done something novel is seen by the generic algorithm + the results of running the software - they should speak for themselves if it truly does the job.
It's completely possible to come up with a new invention and have worldwide adoption within 2 years, and the product even often becomes obsolete within 5 years.
Which makes it even harder to recoup the development costs. If it's not so world-changing that it's not still needed in 5 years, I don't see a problem with it still being patented for all that time, either.
I think you should look closer. Whether the scientists themselves did it or not, major changes in understanding in science precipitate changes in philosophy and culture with an odd resemblance.
You are eligible for unlimited home Internet data if you have a combined bill for Internet and TV services, you purchase the up to 1Gbps speed tier, or you purchase the unlimited data usage option.
That's really not what happens in rural areas. There's a ton of excess capacity, as the number of towers has more to do with covering square mileage by line of sight rather than population density. The problem is that the data usage caps are the same out there on the underutilized towers.
There's more than one use for that copper. Replacing it with cellular is not moving forward and usually a downgrade if you're remote. Replacing it with fiber would be reasonable.
Sometimes the name for the concept becomes the name of a common example. And there's nothing you can do about it now.
As I understand, "meme" was a term for the smallest unit of transmissible information - meaning genetic or otherwise. Blame Dawkins for tying biology to philosophy - he's not the first one to do it. Einstein's theory of relativity is what eventually led to the idea of moral relativism.
This is Slashdot - you read the headline and skip both the summary and the article and go straight to the comments. A search engine is far too much work.
Some will block or greylist IP addresses in certain ranges if they match common ISPs even if the reverse DNS is set correctly. Maybe you just have a small ISP.
Do you have any idea what it takes to get your mail delivered these days and maintain IP reputation? You have to intentionally violate RFCs, and if your static IP is provided by your phone/cable company you get blacklisted anyway.
a lot of vendors still don't process transactions until the evening.
The CVV is used at the authorization stage, not the capture stage. They'd already have an authorization - and the CVV would be valid that moment.
And if the restaurant is PCI compliant, wouldn't it be far better (and less effort / security risk) to store the authorization token than to store the 16-digit card number and CVV anyway?
I'm tired of having to update my Netflix every time my card number gets hacked
You might need to start buying things from more trustworthy places. This shouldn't happen very often at all.
For one, credit card numbers are not stored by PCI-compliant web sites. Even when you "save" your card, it's just generating a token for re-use by only that merchant.
For retailers, you have to compromise the hardware on-site. Unless you shop at Target or Home Depot, you probably won't have this happen to you either outside of shops that aren't trustworthy in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Taking something we already did without computers, and making a program that automates it should not be grounds for copyright.
Uhh...you kind of swapped language. Definitely still grounds for copyright, not patent.
"X...but on a computer" should not be patentable unless X is also novel.
Secondly, a fully working codebase should be submitted with the patent application such that, when the patent is expired, we actually have a record as to how the patented software was actually implemented. You shouldn't just be able to describe what the software does to be awarded a patent. A fully working code base must be presented so that the patent office can determine that you've actually done something novel and that you've actually made software that does what you say it does.
The code would still be protected by copyright - and any implementation based on viewing the source code could be fought as a derivative work (see: Wine project). Knowing whether you've done something novel is seen by the generic algorithm + the results of running the software - they should speak for themselves if it truly does the job.
It's completely possible to come up with a new invention and have worldwide adoption within 2 years, and the product even often becomes obsolete within 5 years.
Which makes it even harder to recoup the development costs. If it's not so world-changing that it's not still needed in 5 years, I don't see a problem with it still being patented for all that time, either.
Easily isn't a requirement. Completely, maybe, but not easily. Not everything is even easy to do.
And strictly speaking those would be patentable if they weren't already clearly in the public domain.
With that argument, you could say that anything using screws to hold it together isn't patentable.
I think you should look closer. Whether the scientists themselves did it or not, major changes in understanding in science precipitate changes in philosophy and culture with an odd resemblance.
Also, they bumped the cap to 1TB for everyone else (except for one really low-end DSL tier that I'm not sure is even in most markets).
You are eligible for unlimited home Internet data if you have a combined bill for Internet and TV services, you purchase the up to 1Gbps speed tier, or you purchase the unlimited data usage option.
Source: AT&T Terms
As far as I can tell the company's products don't really have any relation to its namesake.
Somehow they're trying to pull a Napster while still doing P2P.
That's really not what happens in rural areas. There's a ton of excess capacity, as the number of towers has more to do with covering square mileage by line of sight rather than population density. The problem is that the data usage caps are the same out there on the underutilized towers.
Have a cookie. I for one couldn't wait to get rid of the battery draining shit experience known as skype.
You know that phones can make voice calls, right? And it's even cross-platform.
There's more than one use for that copper. Replacing it with cellular is not moving forward and usually a downgrade if you're remote. Replacing it with fiber would be reasonable.
This is just part of the pain of moving from analog to digital.
No, it's not. Copper lines carry digital data just fine. This is cheaping out on last-mile.
Nice try, but that word's never going to stick.
Sometimes the name for the concept becomes the name of a common example. And there's nothing you can do about it now.
As I understand, "meme" was a term for the smallest unit of transmissible information - meaning genetic or otherwise. Blame Dawkins for tying biology to philosophy - he's not the first one to do it. Einstein's theory of relativity is what eventually led to the idea of moral relativism.
This is Slashdot - you read the headline and skip both the summary and the article and go straight to the comments. A search engine is far too much work.
But then it would cure plastic poisoning, so we're OK.
Some will block or greylist IP addresses in certain ranges if they match common ISPs even if the reverse DNS is set correctly. Maybe you just have a small ISP.
That's not the only RFC violation - in order to prevent backscatter spam, you have to not send most types of NDRs.
PHBender: I’m going to build my own classified ad site with blackjack and hookers.
PHPBender: In fact, forget the classified ads.
Still can't make it work with Facebook's version of events, even when I tried really hard.
Run your own mail-server though
Do you have any idea what it takes to get your mail delivered these days and maintain IP reputation? You have to intentionally violate RFCs, and if your static IP is provided by your phone/cable company you get blacklisted anyway.
The transparency is supposed to be on the government side, not the citizen side.
a lot of vendors still don't process transactions until the evening.
The CVV is used at the authorization stage, not the capture stage. They'd already have an authorization - and the CVV would be valid that moment.
And if the restaurant is PCI compliant, wouldn't it be far better (and less effort / security risk) to store the authorization token than to store the 16-digit card number and CVV anyway?
France requires chip and PIN for card-present transactions.
I'm tired of having to update my Netflix every time my card number gets hacked
You might need to start buying things from more trustworthy places. This shouldn't happen very often at all.
For one, credit card numbers are not stored by PCI-compliant web sites. Even when you "save" your card, it's just generating a token for re-use by only that merchant.
For retailers, you have to compromise the hardware on-site. Unless you shop at Target or Home Depot, you probably won't have this happen to you either outside of shops that aren't trustworthy in the first place.
Wouldn't that just be WINE?
The main difference between the two is the attempt at a kernel that mimics Windows' kernel more directly. Otherwise, they share quite a bit of code.
From Wikipedia:
In cryptography, a nonce is an arbitrary number that may only be used once
You're given multiple nonces for solving one CAPTCHA.
Also Contacts is not about being or not being Facebook friends, it's about identifying phone numbers linked to your account for fallback
That's if you use Messenger for voice. I never have.
Either way, you don't have to give FB's apps permission to Contacts if you don't want to anymore.