You'd think with the monkey hacking diebold and murphy formula articles along with other article regarding diebold voting machine troubles and the persistance on using them.....
So who is now up for jury duty just because they wanted to vote Bush out and thought their vote counted?
Programming is the act of automating the use of complexity, usually made up of simpler complexities, so to enable the use and reuse of the complexity by the user of that complexity, easy.
There is a world of prior art here, going back even before computers were invented, to the initial use of abstractions to express a more complex thought.
to say bookeeping has advanced/evolved to accountant, CPA, auditor, banker, financial advisor, finance professor,.... while saying blacksmithing has dies is so totally incorrect and unfair.
We today have welders and all the related fields of metal working that back then did not exist.
Also the writer seems to have skipped over the 300 year lapse between the introduction of the hindu-arabic decimal system and its finally becomming mainstream over the roman numeral system. Hmmm, seems the elitest roman numeral accountants pursued the lies and arguements that it is silly to think that nothing "zero" can have value....
It should be noted that roman numeral mathmatics is so limited that we could have never developed computers with it.
I also noted in skimming over the article that the writer mentions the "software factory" in MS terms.... this two is with error for a number of reasons, the least of which is not the fact the the book being referenced uses "pattern" as a catch all phrase where as a matter of convience it is converted to various things thruout the book.
MS is a market company first and formost and a third party integrator second. MS's POV on software factories is with distortion of reality and biasing towards MS, rather then honesty about "putting things together" in a manner that automates alot more of what a programmer wouold otherwise do manually ---- but then isn't the act of programming the goal of creating automations of complexity, typically made up of simpler complexities, and done so in order to make the use and reuse of teh complexity easy for the users of the complexity.... hence a natural evolution of the field of programming....rather than an MS invention...
I'd imagine this is enough to bring doubt to the writers message, but I'm sure there is more in error..... though hey.... it sound sooooo good.....
... cars trains and plans can be used in bad ways too.... perhaps we should outlaw all such things...Oh and guns... and... etc...
Hey... didn't someone say "nothing to fear but life itself"?... and shouldn't we just take care of that problem and inherently take care of the rest?
Regardless of what any court says, we all know P2P is like the highway, traveled by many including moonshiners...
What should be becomming more obvious is the failure of the record and movie industy to figure out how to make good use of new technology, rather than trying to stall out innovation...
So the trade off in image capture media quality is file size vs. file size.
Certainly it would take more than a 4 - 5 megapixel (current top of the line for the consumer market?) digital image to compete with 70mm film whos target is a movie theater screen. Or how about larger images which you find on billboards, buss stop ads., etc., in the advertising world where its not uncommon to find image files above 30 megabytes, even above 100 megabytes, etc.
whats common in both medias?
A: lenses. the fact that light is what is being captured and recorded.
digital sensors are the key to better quality for same size of capture.
Yeah, and there are other things that are supposed to disqualify a patent application, such as natural law, physical phenomenon, and abstract ideas.
But there is a matter of rethoric and the inability of a patent examiner to know the difference, so they only qualify whether or not the paperwork, filled with abstractions, passes paperwork abstraction tests. Of course leaving up to the courts to decide, should such a patent go to court or be challenged by an outside party thru the patent office.
The foundation of this problem with software is that the natural laws of the physical phenomenon of the creation and use of abstractions has been failed to be established by both industry and institutes of science and education. Cause, simply money.
In other words, there has been a wide scope failure to establish the physics of abstractions.
Should such a thing be established, then most software patents would be obviously invalid.
sorta like the difference between roman numerals limitation in mathmatics, in comparison to the hindu-arabic decimal system. Where today its more like the mentality of using roman numerals to understand software, but when we come to understand software in the decimal system mentality........
I don't think anyone can really properly comment on this story without at least the opportunuity to read thru the patent.... So where is teh link to the patent, or is this another headline/. distortion?
What if they all decide to stay and continue building this company and its stock value?
What better place to increase your own wealth but where you have had and can continue to have influence on its growth.... as opposed to some disconnected, abstracted stock market game of chance...
Imagine what those who got out early with MS would regret now!
On teh more intelligent side of this, don't ya think the google guys would have considered this... especially given all the apparent presidence...???
Maybe not, however clicking thru a EULA doesn't mean I was conscious of its contents, but only that I clicked thru it.
Then there is the pre-click-thru, the set up.
Was the EULA long and in a small windows, difficult to read?
Then there is the pre=pre-click-thru.... as mentioned by other posters/comments that in order to get to the possibility of click-thru EULA, you have to have already bought it and perhaps without ability to return it once you get to the choice.
Sooooo, as a matter of convience, we can ignore all the pre-click-thru unconscionable things that lead up to it???
A non-sequator (sp?)...
Damnit..... first they get you being unconscious and all of the sudden expect you to be conscious.... Sounds like the salesman task of getting you to say "yes"..... so he can build up to selling you something you don't really want or need...
* we all know the Patent Office needs to figure out a way to stop issuing patent on things they shouldn't. Retoric is a big problem, as you can describe something normally not allowed to be patented (i.e. physical phenomenon, natural law, abstract ideas, algorythims, etc...) in such a manner to pass by a patent examiner (who might then figure they don't know so let the courts decide...)
* there is NO SUCH THING AS A DEFENSIVE PATENT!!!! If you don't want someone to come along behind you and patent what you do, then you publish it and establish authorship/inventorship...... which happens to be a key requirement on a patent application..... DUH! But if you want to spend some money defending yourself the Patent Office will be happy to take your money...
*** Most important is that the Patent Office has defaulted to letting the courts decide whether or not a patent is valid..... You know where a hell of a lot more time and resources and perhaps even public input can be applied, then any patent examainer is ALLOWED to. So all the Patent Office needs to do is simple make sure all the T's are crossed and i' are dotted (that their document specifications are fullfilled --- sort of a pre-court document preparation process)
Oh, by the way, licensing is a abstract idea, as is software. Where copyright would be the more appropriate mode of ownership control.
**** There are other problems with patents and even copyrights. To use them mainly as a tool to hinder others, so as to suppress innovation and competition is simply wrong. For we all only have a limited amount of time to live, so damn anyone who wants to tell you, you cannot do this (unless it infringes on the freedoms of others to do what they want. - freedom does not include any right to take it away from another or others, directly or indirectly.)
The key purpose of patents and copyrights is to allow the creators of such value an opportunity to profit from their work, to receive value for it. But at some point that exclusive right has to be removed, especially when it becomes a hinderance to others in the creation of their new work (perhaps extending or building upon the works of others --- As this IS how we advance.)
Anyone who doesn't understand this building upon the works of others either doesn't understand the natural laws of the human race advancement process or wants to suppress it and the increased freedom it brings (they are OBVIOUSLY either ignorant or against such advancement and freedom, or want to extract unearned wealth directly off the works and labor of others.)
Bottom Line is that IBM is one of many and various types of supporters of FOSS.
Lets say IBM loses against SCO (yeah, we all know better, but for the sake of arguement).... Will tying the OS community to be followers of IBM.... bring Linux down?
Sorry but FOSS is simple stronger in foundation than even the largest and longest standing of companies, for it is of people not legally created and defined enities.
Slashdot Mirror
... two..... 1 and 0
the matrix has you.... on the 13th floor of eXistenZ
.... don't know the election is rigged?
You'd think with the monkey hacking diebold and murphy formula articles along with other article regarding diebold voting machine troubles and the persistance on using them.....
So who is now up for jury duty just because they wanted to vote Bush out and thought their vote counted?
Programming is the act of automating the use of complexity, usually made up of simpler complexities, so to enable the use and reuse of the complexity by the user of that complexity, easy.
There is a world of prior art here, going back even before computers were invented, to the initial use of abstractions to express a more complex thought.
to say bookeeping has advanced/evolved to accountant, CPA, auditor, banker, financial advisor, finance professor, .... while saying blacksmithing has dies is so totally incorrect and unfair.
We today have welders and all the related fields of metal working that back then did not exist.
Also the writer seems to have skipped over the 300 year lapse between the introduction of the hindu-arabic decimal system and its finally becomming mainstream over the roman numeral system. Hmmm, seems the elitest roman numeral accountants pursued the lies and arguements that it is silly to think that nothing "zero" can have value....
It should be noted that roman numeral mathmatics is so limited that we could have never developed computers with it.
I also noted in skimming over the article that the writer mentions the "software factory" in MS terms.... this two is with error for a number of reasons, the least of which is not the fact the the book being referenced uses "pattern" as a catch all phrase where as a matter of convience it is converted to various things thruout the book.
MS is a market company first and formost and a third party integrator second. MS's POV on software factories is with distortion of reality and biasing towards MS, rather then honesty about "putting things together" in a manner that automates alot more of what a programmer wouold otherwise do manually ---- but then isn't the act of programming the goal of creating automations of complexity, typically made up of simpler complexities, and done so in order to make the use and reuse of teh complexity easy for the users of the complexity.... hence a natural evolution of the field of programming....rather than an MS invention...
I'd imagine this is enough to bring doubt to the writers message, but I'm sure there is more in error..... though hey.... it sound sooooo good.....
....Regina
... they'd patent it but teh aliens did it first....
... cars trains and plans can be used in bad ways too.... perhaps we should outlaw all such things...Oh and guns... and ... etc...
... and shouldn't we just take care of that problem and inherently take care of the rest?
Hey... didn't someone say "nothing to fear but life itself"?
Regardless of what any court says, we all know P2P is like the highway, traveled by many including moonshiners...
What should be becomming more obvious is the failure of the record and movie industy to figure out how to make good use of new technology, rather than trying to stall out innovation...
... and then there is the dark ages --- talk about air pollutants...
... at the most annoying time?
Hmmm, now which one(s) of the formula are responsible?
Hmmm, Hmmm.... could it be all of them?
Sure, Film grain vs. Resolution.
So the trade off in image capture media quality is file size vs. file size.
Certainly it would take more than a 4 - 5 megapixel (current top of the line for the consumer market?) digital image to compete with 70mm film whos target is a movie theater screen. Or how about larger images which you find on billboards, buss stop ads., etc., in the advertising world where its not uncommon to find image files above 30 megabytes, even above 100 megabytes, etc.
whats common in both medias?
A: lenses. the fact that light is what is being captured and recorded.
digital sensors are the key to better quality for same size of capture.
Yeah, and there are other things that are supposed to disqualify a patent application, such as natural law, physical phenomenon, and abstract ideas.
....
But there is a matter of rethoric and the inability of a patent examiner to know the difference, so they only qualify whether or not the paperwork, filled with abstractions, passes paperwork abstraction tests. Of course leaving up to the courts to decide, should such a patent go to court or be challenged by an outside party thru the patent office.
The foundation of this problem with software is that the natural laws of the physical phenomenon of the creation and use of abstractions has been failed to be established by both industry and institutes of science and education. Cause, simply money.
In other words, there has been a wide scope failure to establish the physics of abstractions.
Should such a thing be established, then most software patents would be obviously invalid.
sorta like the difference between roman numerals limitation in mathmatics, in comparison to the hindu-arabic decimal system. Where today its more like the mentality of using roman numerals to understand software, but when we come to understand software in the decimal system mentality....
isn't big brother supposed to be monitoring all cell phone calls?
Point being, are they admitting a failure?
Or who ever believed the government is capable of such widescope privacy invasion?
I don't think anyone can really properly comment on this story without at least the opportunuity to read thru the patent.... So where is teh link to the patent, or is this another headline /. distortion?
They are a marketuing company first and formost, a software developer second or third (law might be their second, as it applies to marketing).
Who do they market to?
Anyone and everyone who can either make them money or influence their incomming finances.
We all know truth in advertising is lacking at MS.
What if they all decide to stay and continue building this company and its stock value?
What better place to increase your own wealth but where you have had and can continue to have influence on its growth.... as opposed to some disconnected, abstracted stock market game of chance...
Imagine what those who got out early with MS would regret now!
On teh more intelligent side of this, don't ya think the google guys would have considered this... especially given all the apparent presidence...???
Maybe not, however clicking thru a EULA doesn't mean I was conscious of its contents, but only that I clicked thru it.
..... so he can build up to selling you something you don't really want or need...
Then there is the pre-click-thru, the set up.
Was the EULA long and in a small windows, difficult to read?
Then there is the pre=pre-click-thru.... as mentioned by other posters/comments that in order to get to the possibility of click-thru EULA, you have to have already bought it and perhaps without ability to return it once you get to the choice.
Sooooo, as a matter of convience, we can ignore all the pre-click-thru unconscionable things that lead up to it???
A non-sequator (sp?)...
Damnit..... first they get you being unconscious and all of the sudden expect you to be conscious.... Sounds like the salesman task of getting you to say "yes"
....Means that your system is a security risk...
.....
Hmmm..... I guess that could be extended to mean that pre-installing Linux
Wait a minute...... piracy = security risk???
Hmmm.... maybe MS is on to something here....
... under the main menu edit, then preferences ... then advanced... to Software updates
* It doesn't mean much to file for a patent.
* we all know the Patent Office needs to figure out a way to stop issuing patent on things they shouldn't. Retoric is a big problem, as you can describe something normally not allowed to be patented (i.e. physical phenomenon, natural law, abstract ideas, algorythims, etc...) in such a manner to pass by a patent examiner (who might then figure they don't know so let the courts decide...)
* there is NO SUCH THING AS A DEFENSIVE PATENT!!!! If you don't want someone to come along behind you and patent what you do, then you publish it and establish authorship/inventorship...... which happens to be a key requirement on a patent application..... DUH! But if you want to spend some money defending yourself the Patent Office will be happy to take your money...
*** Most important is that the Patent Office has defaulted to letting the courts decide whether or not a patent is valid..... You know where a hell of a lot more time and resources and perhaps even public input can be applied, then any patent examainer is ALLOWED to. So all the Patent Office needs to do is simple make sure all the T's are crossed and i' are dotted (that their document specifications are fullfilled --- sort of a pre-court document preparation process)
Oh, by the way, licensing is a abstract idea, as is software. Where copyright would be the more appropriate mode of ownership control.
**** There are other problems with patents and even copyrights. To use them mainly as a tool to hinder others, so as to suppress innovation and competition is simply wrong. For we all only have a limited amount of time to live, so damn anyone who wants to tell you, you cannot do this (unless it infringes on the freedoms of others to do what they want. - freedom does not include any right to take it away from another or others, directly or indirectly.)
The key purpose of patents and copyrights is to allow the creators of such value an opportunity to profit from their work, to receive value for it. But at some point that exclusive right has to be removed, especially when it becomes a hinderance to others in the creation of their new work (perhaps extending or building upon the works of others --- As this IS how we advance.)
Anyone who doesn't understand this building upon the works of others either doesn't understand the natural laws of the human race advancement process or wants to suppress it and the increased freedom it brings (they are OBVIOUSLY either ignorant or against such advancement and freedom, or want to extract unearned wealth directly off the works and labor of others.)
Does anyone have a patent on the GPL?
NO?? Why is that?
Don't forget the patent on swinging sideways on a swing and the patent on teh wheel...
Keep in mind software patents are by definition of what can and cannot be patented..... invalid.
you cannot patent abstract ideas and just what is it that you think software is... but abstraction...
The best way to deal with this is to realize the degradation fo the value of teh patent system due to its failure to follow its own basis.
Why don't we just say Linux violates the desires of corporations that prefer having control and ownership rights to thinking? (re: abstract ideas)
the problem with such media is the light source it may be placed in for a length of time.
The sun has teh full spectrum
yeah right, like there is a single HD format....
... MS Levels of computer terminology?
;)
I'm having hard time understanding this article...
...change a light bulb?
None, as its a hardware problem. But it requires a room full of MS programmers to figure that out.
So how many MS hardware engineers does it take to Change a light bulb?
None, as it is a environment specialist problem. But it takes a building full of hardware engineers to figure that out.
How many environment specialist does it take to change a light bulb?
None as it is a maintance problem, but it takes a complex full of environment specialist to figure that out.
So how many maintance personel does it take to change a light bulb?
One and Shes polish, but first she has to get purchasing to order a light bulb.
How hard is it for her to get purchasing to order a light bulb?
harder than it is to just take a light buld from some hotel room or other business and use it instead.
Now thats innovation and job creation.
Point being, MS does not innovate, so how whould they know what innovation is?
Correction, what is their definition of innovation?
The light bulb in someone elses building.
Bottom Line is that IBM is one of many and various types of supporters of FOSS.
Lets say IBM loses against SCO (yeah, we all know better, but for the sake of arguement).... Will tying the OS community to be followers of IBM.... bring Linux down?
Sorry but FOSS is simple stronger in foundation than even the largest and longest standing of companies, for it is of people not legally created and defined enities.