Living in a teepee is doing a HUGE concession on you quality of life. Not living under a high tension line is not.
High tension lines in the back yard can mean a huge difference in the price of a house, mainly due to people thinking like you. This price difference can easily mean the difference between your three children having to share a bedroom or not. That's a pretty serious quality of life difference.
A great deal of the music I have on CD (all 800 of them) is ripped to MP3 and sitting on my Archos jukebox. I guess these online music solutions care not about people like me.
Considering how few people have purchased an Archos jukebox, especially compared to the iPod; and considering the political and practical costs of caring about people like you, there's no good reason for any of these companies to cater to you. You're insignifigant. If you don't conform to the masses you will be inconvienienced by your practices. It's a common trait of a profit driven market. Besides, your niche is being served, however inconvieniently, by the record stores. You can still buy and rip CDs.
So I guess you'd support police forces installing surveillance cameras on the street, right ?
How is this even close to the same thing? I don't understand how you can equate listning in on broadcast transmissions to spending tax dollars on automated surveillance. You shouldn't be able to expect privacy walking down the street, but that doesn't mean I want my money being spent on cameras. If somebody wants to put a camera up on their own property, or attached to their body, and they're paying for it out of their own pocket, then who am I to stop them?
After all, if you don't want somebody monitoring and recording you, wear a disguise.
Absoultly. There's no difference between a cop standing on the corner or a camera from a technical perspective. You're not opposed to the existance of law enforcement, are you? The big difference is probability. It's easier to live with a low probability of being watched than with a guarantee of being watched. Without cameras, a guarantee of being watched is impractical, so we are left with an acceptable probability of being watched by proxy. From your comment though one could interpolate that you're against people being able to look at you in public.
That would be great. Signals should be broadcast at the transmitter's peril. If you don't want somebody listening in, encrypt.
Do you honestly think that somebody won't listen in on your transmissions just because it's illegal? The regulations and laws only provide a false sense on security.
No broadcaster is stupid enough to make any broadcast technology unviewable on existing TV sets. If you can watch it on an existing analog TV, you can record it on an existing VCR. The industry would be shooting themselves in the foot to do otherwise. There will be boxes for sale to decode any digital broadcast and put out standard analog NTSC video on any of the currently popular connection types. You will, of course, be able to filter the Macrovision protection out of the signal at that point. Boxes that do this are available in the $10 range. Your VCR will work for many additional decades (unless it breaks mechanically).
Considering what I've seen my town waste $20 millon on, this thing seems like it could be downright affordable. How's a power hungry (I mean that in many ways) local governement to decide? More control over the local power grid (they love control) or nuclear material in town (there probably already is some, but ignorance is bliss). Such a dilema.
When I switched the only downside was having to explain to Verisign why I wasn't renewing my certificate with them when their sales drone called weekly from a month before expiration to three months after. I got tired of them telling me that unless I wasted money with them my customers wouldn't trust me. The end user experience on our site was seemless, and the hold times on the phone with Thawte are shorter.
Now if only I didn't have to have to pay for a landline to have DSL. I *never* use it. It's basically a $20 adder on my internet bill. Damn you Verizon!
Reliability is no reason to privatize the root servers. If he really thought that private root servers were more reliable, they could just add some privately owned ones and let the public ones continue to operate. The only reason to privatize the public servers is control. This guy must have an evil plan that he feels he'd never be able to convince the root server operators to go along with. It's the only possible reason for this suggestion. Root servers certainly aren't ever going to be profitable in their current form.
Complete this sentence:
on
CNet on WinFS
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
He goes on to describe such a filesystem as the 'holy grail' that is sought by developers......of high end processors, memory manufacturers, and name brand PC makers, who's sales have been down lately due to current software running well enough on previous generation hardware.
Like you're one to talk. You gave in a signed up before me! At least a month before from the looks of it!
--
A little background for all the newbies out there, (If your ID is over 50k, you're probably a newbie) when Slashdot started user registration there was an anti-registration movement and loads of complaints about what slashdot may do with our personal information and such. When it got to about 15k registrations it mostly died down and everybody forgot about it. Most of the people with IDs between 10k and 20k are the ones that were anti-registration and held out for a while.
First of all, the patent was filed in 1996, so you're 3 years too late to be *prior* art.
Secondly I would bet your pages don't infringe. Do you organize your customization form by topics like News, Life, Technology, or Weather? If not you're in the clear.
That doesn't sound anything like this patent. The patent clearly states that it covers implementations with HTML forms and cookies. Did you have those in 1983? I didn't think so.
Only in the context of the rest of the claims. It's clear from your comment that you don't know the whole story of what happened at your place of business.
You can't count the number of patents that have something as generic as "An electronic device" as the first claim. That doesn't mean the patent covers all electronic devices. The first claim is limited by the later claims.
You'd have to go out of your way to infringe this patent. Lets look at some of the things you have to do:
You must provide the user's identifier on the server side. This means that if you use a user entered login name as the database index for the customization information, you're safe.
The server side user ID *must* be stored in a cookie.
Only HTML is covered. (I.E. not XHTML).
Only HTML forms are covered.
Customization options must be catagorized under headings, and the only headings covered are news, sports, financial matters, entertainment, science and technology, life, and weather. Not grouping the options selection form in that manner makes you a non-infringer. I can't think of any sites that do this. Perhaps MSN.com did at one point?
I would guess that it took so long to get this patent because it was overly broad when filed, and the USPTO made microsoft narrow it down to something so specific as to not really matter before issuing it. That's an example of the USPTO working correctly.
Considering the number of now fish free rivers due to dams, I'd say that we don't have 100% of the downsides there controlled yet. Better than coal, but not as manageable as you'd hope...
Slashdot Mirror
Living in a teepee is doing a HUGE concession on you quality of life. Not living under a high tension line is not.
High tension lines in the back yard can mean a huge difference in the price of a house, mainly due to people thinking like you. This price difference can easily mean the difference between your three children having to share a bedroom or not. That's a pretty serious quality of life difference.
A great deal of the music I have on CD (all 800 of them) is ripped to MP3 and sitting on my Archos jukebox. I guess these online music solutions care not about people like me.
Considering how few people have purchased an Archos jukebox, especially compared to the iPod; and considering the political and practical costs of caring about people like you, there's no good reason for any of these companies to cater to you. You're insignifigant. If you don't conform to the masses you will be inconvienienced by your practices. It's a common trait of a profit driven market. Besides, your niche is being served, however inconvieniently, by the record stores. You can still buy and rip CDs.
So I guess you'd support police forces installing surveillance cameras on the street, right ?
How is this even close to the same thing? I don't understand how you can equate listning in on broadcast transmissions to spending tax dollars on automated surveillance. You shouldn't be able to expect privacy walking down the street, but that doesn't mean I want my money being spent on cameras. If somebody wants to put a camera up on their own property, or attached to their body, and they're paying for it out of their own pocket, then who am I to stop them?
After all, if you don't want somebody monitoring and recording you, wear a disguise.
Absoultly. There's no difference between a cop standing on the corner or a camera from a technical perspective. You're not opposed to the existance of law enforcement, are you? The big difference is probability. It's easier to live with a low probability of being watched than with a guarantee of being watched. Without cameras, a guarantee of being watched is impractical, so we are left with an acceptable probability of being watched by proxy. From your comment though one could interpolate that you're against people being able to look at you in public.
Do you honestly support such a thing?
That would be great. Signals should be broadcast at the transmitter's peril. If you don't want somebody listening in, encrypt.
Do you honestly think that somebody won't listen in on your transmissions just because it's illegal? The regulations and laws only provide a false sense on security.
Bull.
No broadcaster is stupid enough to make any broadcast technology unviewable on existing TV sets. If you can watch it on an existing analog TV, you can record it on an existing VCR. The industry would be shooting themselves in the foot to do otherwise. There will be boxes for sale to decode any digital broadcast and put out standard analog NTSC video on any of the currently popular connection types. You will, of course, be able to filter the Macrovision protection out of the signal at that point. Boxes that do this are available in the $10 range. Your VCR will work for many additional decades (unless it breaks mechanically).
2-3 dozen is a vast underestimation. The US has 119, and there are 491 floating reactors on the oceans today.
Considering what I've seen my town waste $20 millon on, this thing seems like it could be downright affordable. How's a power hungry (I mean that in many ways) local governement to decide? More control over the local power grid (they love control) or nuclear material in town (there probably already is some, but ignorance is bliss). Such a dilema.
...and perpetuate the idea that everybody uses IE and other browsers aren't worth targeting.
Better idea: don't patronize that web site.
When I switched the only downside was having to explain to Verisign why I wasn't renewing my certificate with them when their sales drone called weekly from a month before expiration to three months after. I got tired of them telling me that unless I wasted money with them my customers wouldn't trust me. The end user experience on our site was seemless, and the hold times on the phone with Thawte are shorter.
Have you noticed that Yahoo maps is way better now than it was then?
If Microsoft did that there would be a lawsuit, and Microsoft would loose.
Unlike Netscape, Apple would still be around at the end of such a suit.
I pay $20 a month for my phone line...I'd describe my land line as down right affordable!
You have the internet connection and cell phone anyway. $20 a month for a redundant service is not affordable, it's wasteful.
Now if only I didn't have to have to pay for a landline to have DSL. I *never* use it. It's basically a $20 adder on my internet bill. Damn you Verizon!
Testing (QA) on the new product, mainly to help develop some means of support across the organization; ie standards.
That's a joke, right? You do test the software you're "upgrading" to just as much as the software you may migrate to, right?
Training. Sure it might LOOK like package X. The key is finding the quirks that generate support calls and find solutions.
Sounds similar to the situations you'll encounter switching from Windows 2000 to XP.
Reliability is no reason to privatize the root servers. If he really thought that private root servers were more reliable, they could just add some privately owned ones and let the public ones continue to operate. The only reason to privatize the public servers is control. This guy must have an evil plan that he feels he'd never be able to convince the root server operators to go along with. It's the only possible reason for this suggestion. Root servers certainly aren't ever going to be profitable in their current form.
He goes on to describe such a filesystem as the 'holy grail' that is sought by developers... ...of high end processors, memory manufacturers, and name brand PC makers, who's sales have been down lately due to current software running well enough on previous generation hardware.
I could have written a better script if I stuck a felt tip marker up my ass and then played twister for a few hours.
I'd bet you could get some grant money for that...
Only if you don't wash the marker off afterward though.
Any document that contains any kind of HyperText Markup Language format is covered by this patent.
Not any HTML document. It still has to fit the rest of the terms.
Like you're one to talk. You gave in a signed up before me! At least a month before from the looks of it!
--
A little background for all the newbies out there, (If your ID is over 50k, you're probably a newbie) when Slashdot started user registration there was an anti-registration movement and loads of complaints about what slashdot may do with our personal information and such. When it got to about 15k registrations it mostly died down and everybody forgot about it. Most of the people with IDs between 10k and 20k are the ones that were anti-registration and held out for a while.
First of all, the patent was filed in 1996, so you're 3 years too late to be *prior* art.
Secondly I would bet your pages don't infringe. Do you organize your customization form by topics like News, Life, Technology, or Weather? If not you're in the clear.
That doesn't sound anything like this patent. The patent clearly states that it covers implementations with HTML forms and cookies. Did you have those in 1983? I didn't think so.
that first wild claim is enforceable
Only in the context of the rest of the claims. It's clear from your comment that you don't know the whole story of what happened at your place of business.
You can't count the number of patents that have something as generic as "An electronic device" as the first claim. That doesn't mean the patent covers all electronic devices. The first claim is limited by the later claims.
You'd have to go out of your way to infringe this patent. Lets look at some of the things you have to do:
You must provide the user's identifier on the server side. This means that if you use a user entered login name as the database index for the customization information, you're safe.
The server side user ID *must* be stored in a cookie.
Only HTML is covered. (I.E. not XHTML).
Only HTML forms are covered.
Customization options must be catagorized under headings, and the only headings covered are news, sports, financial matters, entertainment, science and technology, life, and weather. Not grouping the options selection form in that manner makes you a non-infringer. I can't think of any sites that do this. Perhaps MSN.com did at one point?
I would guess that it took so long to get this patent because it was overly broad when filed, and the USPTO made microsoft narrow it down to something so specific as to not really matter before issuing it. That's an example of the USPTO working correctly.
Considering the number of now fish free rivers due to dams, I'd say that we don't have 100% of the downsides there controlled yet. Better than coal, but not as manageable as you'd hope...
That makes more sense. If you scale up the node count the price is still higher and the performance is still lower though.
Good to know that UT didn't really get ripped off.