You can't use "for" and "per" interchangeably. "For" is multiplication, "per" is division. 1,000 Joules per second for 3,600 seconds is 3,600,000 (J/s) * s or 3,600,000 J.
https://www.google.com/search?q=1+kWh+in+J
Some software is innovative and deserves patent protection...
I don't necessarily think that all software patents should be thrown out, but if the system can't be overhauled to correct this problem, then I think that would be better than what we have now.
The problem is that because of the way software patents work, and the way software works, unlike in other industries you just can't make a significant product that doesn't infringe major companies' software patents. They have too many that are too broad, and even if you think you can win you certainly can't afford to litigate it as a small company.
Some software is innovative and deserves patent protection, but he's arguing against the extremely broad patents granted to some companies. These patents make it impossible for startups to create certain types of software, but a larger company could just cross-license the patents. Even when the smaller company is in the right, litigation would be extremely expensive, and likely drive them into bankruptcy.
You do realize that the entire point of this is so you don't have to look at the screen while typing, right? You just type normally and the keyboard adjusts to you automatically.
This always annoys me:
The theory of evolution only deals with how life evolved after it got here, not how it originated. That's abiogenesis. People seem to always get the two confused.
Slashdot Mirror
I meant you can do complete logic with just NOR.
You forgot NOR.
Because obtaining a patent is expensive and defending it is even more so.
You can't use "for" and "per" interchangeably. "For" is multiplication, "per" is division. 1,000 Joules per second for 3,600 seconds is 3,600,000 (J/s) * s or 3,600,000 J.
https://www.google.com/search?q=1+kWh+in+J
Some software is innovative and deserves patent protection...
I don't necessarily think that all software patents should be thrown out, but if the system can't be overhauled to correct this problem, then I think that would be better than what we have now.
The problem is that because of the way software patents work, and the way software works, unlike in other industries you just can't make a significant product that doesn't infringe major companies' software patents. They have too many that are too broad, and even if you think you can win you certainly can't afford to litigate it as a small company.
Some software is innovative and deserves patent protection, but he's arguing against the extremely broad patents granted to some companies. These patents make it impossible for startups to create certain types of software, but a larger company could just cross-license the patents. Even when the smaller company is in the right, litigation would be extremely expensive, and likely drive them into bankruptcy.
No, it completely changed the size, rotation, etc. of the entire keyboard dynamically.
You do realize that the entire point of this is so you don't have to look at the screen while typing, right? You just type normally and the keyboard adjusts to you automatically.
I definitely remember seeing a YouTube video of an app that does this exact same thing.
This always annoys me: The theory of evolution only deals with how life evolved after it got here, not how it originated. That's abiogenesis. People seem to always get the two confused.
I've still got the disc and floppy. It was my first Linux.