Patents do work, especially in the medical area. Pharmaceuticals would be prohibitive to develop (without direct state involvement) without patent protection.
Unfortionatly, becouse of this protection, it also gives companies insentive to sell as much of a developed product as possible, at whatever cost they so choose, which, quite often, is at an EXTREMELY handsome profit, even taking into consideration R&D efforts.
Let's patent the process of electing government officials in a democratic method utilizing an electorial college, and sue the pants off the government.
Generally, you have to hunt for the grants. The grants are generally to provide research and development twards a specific goal.
Take a look at grants.gov as a good starting place. From there, search. Find a grant that MAY be considered relevant. Bear in mind, you'll need a buisness and commercialization plan as well. It isn't just 'free money'. But do your homework, and you could get upwards of 100k.
What can be done with it is amazing. But it can't be done in the same manner as other. for the most part, single threaded games.
It takes alot more work, but the results can be incredible. To give you an example, this can mean the same kind of improvement that happened when 3d accelerators where introduced, and the processing of 3d content was being processed by a card meant to do it, instead of the CPU in the system.
Alot of people comment on how the processors AREN'T doing any of the video rendering. That there's an nvidia card in there to do it. But who says that card *IS* doing all of the rendering. The video card could just as easily just be used to manage memory, and get the memory onto the screen, without actually doing much acceleration at all.
Granted, alot of games are going to be strait ports, single threaded, and will be on par with the xBox 360. It's the producers who can manage the abilities of a new platform that is gonna kick yer camries are all over..
I wouldn't be so sure. If they had solid plans, they'd say exactly what they where.
I suspect it's a moving target. If they where going to make a spring, 2006, they'd have started up production already, and someone would leak that they're making components for the beast.
I bet if you did some research, anyone could find other solutions. It's just a matter of cost. And if that's the case, they CHOSE to live there..:-) If there is a market, providers will find you. If there isn't, then they can't complain they live in the boonies and don't have a strip club in their town.;-)
And you think they don't have to for network traffic?
Sure they do. And, that's what your paying for. And guess what? they don't have enough for everyone to HAVE what they're actually paying for. Not only that, but major providers generally peer for little charge, as they also provide the ability for the remote carrier to peer THEIR traffic as well.
Bandwidth doesn't have to considered finite - it *is* finite. And no, they don't have to fire up another reactor, they have to hook up to dark fiber (expensive once all the gear is purchased) or lay more fiber (very, very expensive).
One would also assume they're not overselling, and gathering more *PAYING* customers without increasing bandwidth. And comparitavly speaking, bandwidth IS cheap. If your trying to argue that they have to 'fire up a new OC3', then they probrably have an additional 1,000 customers paying at LEAST 40 bucks a month.
On the phone side, I can purchase unlimited calling plans easily. Not only that, but there's a REASON for the expense. The phone company has to pay OTHER phone companies to get where they need to go.
Comparing it to electricity is even worse. Electricity is a VERY finite resource. True, bandwidth could be considered finite, but bandwidth doesn't require them fire up another reactor to generate more juice.
It'll never actually stick. It's the same sort of idea as unlimited access. Remember back in the day, when you had 20 hours a month? Maybee 30, 40?
Long gone, aren't they..
If they do it, Google or the such will go ahead and build their own damned network, and eventually, anyone implementing this sort of idea will be forced to remove it to compete.
Errm, except you _do_ need to modify the client, otherwise it won't understand the new data you're transporting (VoIP). So where was the advantage over using the industry standard protocol?
When it comes to mixed mode mdia comminications, SIP is hardly a standard. The closest thing that comes to s standard is Netmeeting, and yes, it can interface with SIP, but doesn't use it natively. The purpose of Jingle *IS NOT* to provide a telephone number for your IM name.
On another note, once upon a time, people would have looked at your funny and said 'Why use this SIP crap? Just use Digital T1 signaling over the wire!'.
Similarly, if you want the server to do anything interesting you also need to modify that (voicemail?).
There are many things from a serverside perspective that can be done and applied to any interaction that does not require knowledge of the services that server provides specifically. Store and forward, message routing, delivery confirmation, are just a few examples of what it can provide.
Is it a bad time to point out that alot of SIP interfaces can use HTTP to transport call information?
Christ, what good does a hypertext protocol do for a telephone call?:-)
I would much prefer to see effort going into supporting the existing industry standard protocol rather than creating another set of software that just reimplements what we already have in an incompatable way (I still haven't found a decent FOSS Linux SIP softphone). And on the subject of compatability, you can already get plenty of hardware SIP phones (either desk phones or walk-about 802.11 phones) and they won't work with XMPP.
Well, go do it. Alot of us who might actually work on some of these things don't like being told what we should be doing just becouse YOU want it. Most would consider THAT sort of request.. Commercial Software.. But I'm glad you have the need to give your preferences on what the engineers having fun should be doing..
Ever wonder *WHY* you can't find any decent VoIP open source softphones?
It's not required, as the context of addressing is different within XMPP.
The raw phone number versus a user ID would be different entities, but there's no reason why it couldn't have a user register the number with the server, and dynamically, the number would now resolve to the user.
Now there would obviously be some sort of security tracking involved, but one could build into a server component the registration of numbers, and due to the use of presence and resources within XMPP, dynamically remap the numbers to the one your currently available at. Example:
6035551212@voip.jabber.org - Home 6032319874@voip.jabber.org - Work 6034936541@void.jabber.org - Cell
If a component provided mappings to a given JID, in my case, tcharron@jabber.org, based on presence notifications provided, I could map any of these numbers to each other, which in reality, maps to my JID.
I'm blathering. Basically, to answer the question in a short form, yes, but it's inferred support by the Jabber/XMPP protocol itself. Jingle doesnt have to support it, becouse it sits on top of a protocol that can handle this type of thing.
Mostly becouse XMPP can be extended easily to transport new types of data, without requiring modification of the existing protocol/servers/clients.
SIP is great. For phone calls. Adding VoIP transport information to Jabber/XMPP is mad easy. Adding the actual handling OF the VoIP content which is, in reality, transport OOB (same with SIP anyway), is a bit harder for clients to do, but having Jabber support means one application can use the same common protocol for more things.
The largest issue with the usage of transports in this way is having to provide your user information to the transport in order for it to log into the server 'on your behalf'.
There is also issues when AOL or Yahoo deicde that 'too many connections' are coming in from a given IP, they tend to blacklist that IP.
This is one of the prime reasons why jabber.org no longer runs AIM/Yahoo/MSIM transports.
Test out of the class, or seek permission to skip the class. Nearly every major college has the ability to seek professors permission to skip the required courses.
Slashdot Mirror
Patents do work, especially in the medical area. Pharmaceuticals would be prohibitive to develop (without direct state involvement) without patent protection.
Unfortionatly, becouse of this protection, it also gives companies insentive to sell as much of a developed product as possible, at whatever cost they so choose, which, quite often, is at an EXTREMELY handsome profit, even taking into consideration R&D efforts.
Emulation and duplication are two different things.
So.. Now, everything anyone see's, they patent.
First to file gets it, right?
Let's patent the process of electing government officials in a democratic method utilizing an electorial college, and sue the pants off the government.
First to file afterall..
I just bought one 2 weeks ago for my son.. Toysrus in Nashua, NH.
Very nice set, just wish it wasnt so damned expensive.
Generally, you have to hunt for the grants. The grants are generally to provide research and development twards a specific goal.
Take a look at grants.gov as a good starting place. From there, search. Find a grant that MAY be considered relevant. Bear in mind, you'll need a buisness and commercialization plan as well. It isn't just 'free money'. But do your homework, and you could get upwards of 100k.
What can be done with it is amazing. But it can't be done in the same manner as other. for the most part, single threaded games.
It takes alot more work, but the results can be incredible. To give you an example, this can mean the same kind of improvement that happened when 3d accelerators where introduced, and the processing of 3d content was being processed by a card meant to do it, instead of the CPU in the system.
Alot of people comment on how the processors AREN'T doing any of the video rendering. That there's an nvidia card in there to do it. But who says that card *IS* doing all of the rendering. The video card could just as easily just be used to manage memory, and get the memory onto the screen, without actually doing much acceleration at all.
Granted, alot of games are going to be strait ports, single threaded, and will be on par with the xBox 360. It's the producers who can manage the abilities of a new platform that is gonna kick yer camries are all over..
It's more like moving to a car with 8 engines.. ;-)
I'd say it's a bit more complex then you suggest.
I wouldn't be so sure. If they had solid plans, they'd say exactly what they where.
I suspect it's a moving target. If they where going to make a spring, 2006, they'd have started up production already, and someone would leak that they're making components for the beast.
I bet if you did some research, anyone could find other solutions. It's just a matter of cost. And if that's the case, they CHOSE to live there.. :-) If there is a market, providers will find you. If there isn't, then they can't complain they live in the boonies and don't have a strip club in their town. ;-)
And you think they don't have to for network traffic?
Sure they do. And, that's what your paying for. And guess what? they don't have enough for everyone to HAVE what they're actually paying for. Not only that, but major providers generally peer for little charge, as they also provide the ability for the remote carrier to peer THEIR traffic as well.
Bandwidth doesn't have to considered finite - it *is* finite. And no, they don't have to fire up another reactor, they have to hook up to dark fiber (expensive once all the gear is purchased) or lay more fiber (very, very expensive).
One would also assume they're not overselling, and gathering more *PAYING* customers without increasing bandwidth. And comparitavly speaking, bandwidth IS cheap. If your trying to argue that they have to 'fire up a new OC3', then they probrably have an additional 1,000 customers paying at LEAST 40 bucks a month.
There is no way in heck you can say that you have no choice for bandwidth. No way at all.
Someone ELSE will sell bandwidth. Bandwidth is as easy to buy as Candy is at 7-11.
Doesn't really work.
On the phone side, I can purchase unlimited calling plans easily. Not only that, but there's a REASON for the expense. The phone company has to pay OTHER phone companies to get where they need to go.
Comparing it to electricity is even worse. Electricity is a VERY finite resource. True, bandwidth could be considered finite, but bandwidth doesn't require them fire up another reactor to generate more juice.
It'll never actually stick. It's the same sort of idea as unlimited access. Remember back in the day, when you had 20 hours a month? Maybee 30, 40?
Long gone, aren't they..
If they do it, Google or the such will go ahead and build their own damned network, and eventually, anyone implementing this sort of idea will be forced to remove it to compete.
Sure you can.
;-)
Only release the music to be listened to at predefined locations within your local mall. While nekid. And cavity searched..
But you CAN use a Cypher in New Jersey..
Errm, except you _do_ need to modify the client, otherwise it won't understand the new data you're transporting (VoIP). So where was the advantage over using the industry standard protocol?
:-)
When it comes to mixed mode mdia comminications, SIP is hardly a standard. The closest thing that comes to s standard is Netmeeting, and yes, it can interface with SIP, but doesn't use it natively. The purpose of Jingle *IS NOT* to provide a telephone number for your IM name.
On another note, once upon a time, people would have looked at your funny and said 'Why use this SIP crap? Just use Digital T1 signaling over the wire!'.
Similarly, if you want the server to do anything interesting you also need to modify that (voicemail?).
There are many things from a serverside perspective that can be done and applied to any interaction that does not require knowledge of the services that server provides specifically. Store and forward, message routing, delivery confirmation, are just a few examples of what it can provide.
Is it a bad time to point out that alot of SIP interfaces can use HTTP to transport call information?
Christ, what good does a hypertext protocol do for a telephone call?
I would much prefer to see effort going into supporting the existing industry standard protocol rather than creating another set of software that just reimplements what we already have in an incompatable way (I still haven't found a decent FOSS Linux SIP softphone). And on the subject of compatability, you can already get plenty of hardware SIP phones (either desk phones or walk-about 802.11 phones) and they won't work with XMPP.
Well, go do it. Alot of us who might actually work on some of these things don't like being told what we should be doing just becouse YOU want it. Most would consider THAT sort of request.. Commercial Software.. But I'm glad you have the need to give your preferences on what the engineers having fun should be doing..
Ever wonder *WHY* you can't find any decent VoIP open source softphones?
It's not required, as the context of addressing is different within XMPP.
The raw phone number versus a user ID would be different entities, but there's no reason why it couldn't have a user register the number with the server, and dynamically, the number would now resolve to the user.
Now there would obviously be some sort of security tracking involved, but one could build into a server component the registration of numbers, and due to the use of presence and resources within XMPP, dynamically remap the numbers to the one your currently available at. Example:
6035551212@voip.jabber.org - Home
6032319874@voip.jabber.org - Work
6034936541@void.jabber.org - Cell
If a component provided mappings to a given JID, in my case, tcharron@jabber.org, based on presence notifications provided, I could map any of these numbers to each other, which in reality, maps to my JID.
I'm blathering. Basically, to answer the question in a short form, yes, but it's inferred support by the Jabber/XMPP protocol itself. Jingle doesnt have to support it, becouse it sits on top of a protocol that can handle this type of thing.
Mostly becouse XMPP can be extended easily to transport new types of data, without requiring modification of the existing protocol/servers/clients.
SIP is great. For phone calls. Adding VoIP transport information to Jabber/XMPP is mad easy. Adding the actual handling OF the VoIP content which is, in reality, transport OOB (same with SIP anyway), is a bit harder for clients to do, but having Jabber support means one application can use the same common protocol for more things.
The largest issue with the usage of transports in this way is having to provide your user information to the transport in order for it to log into the server 'on your behalf'.
There is also issues when AOL or Yahoo deicde that 'too many connections' are coming in from a given IP, they tend to blacklist that IP.
This is one of the prime reasons why jabber.org no longer runs AIM/Yahoo/MSIM transports.
Test out of the class, or seek permission to skip the class. Nearly every major college has the ability to seek professors permission to skip the required courses.
LOL!
Please tell me your not trying to tell me printing under Linux or other open source environments is EASY.
VB isn't really 'programming' in my opinion. But VB is a great RAD prototyping tool.
I look at VB this way. VB is a great way to get something done quickly if you don't have the time to do it the RIGHT way.
This doesn't work, for one reason. You goto a Gym to workout, for the most part, alone.
Part of the benifit of playing an MMORPG is the fact that you play WITH other people.
Too little people, people get bored, and leave.
Sony does something like it with Gamecards. Cept, it's a matter of play one month, dont play the next..