It will be interesting to find out exactly what was in the contract. That will come out in the lawsuit,
You're assuming NG didn't throw in a binding arbitration clause together with their general Disclaimer of Warranty and Force Majeure covering unexpected situations such as a GPS Rollover as part of the client onboarding.
Citizens must sue the city and file for an emergency injunction!
Injunction from a court has zero weight over the emergency powers of government executives. (The emergency executive powers override any court issuances while the ordinary civil order is suspended)
Because security in IT terms is not an absolute. It's a compromise. If you want to be secure switch off your fucking computer.
Based on that argument...... Chrome should eliminate HTTPS certificate verification support, accept any connection presented by default, and make that an optional Add-On that has to be installed; Rejecting old versions of SSL such as SSLv3 would also be an Optional Addon similar to the option to shut off scripting... because Security in IT terms is not an absolute, and verifying TLS connections has nothing to do with processing HTTP requests.
It's an outdated concept, a relic from when we we're uncivilized.
I agree they're outdated, but they are also a nice reminder of tradition, And usually they have the candor to stay out of political matters.
If the latter changes, then I would firmly suggest a democratic revolution and abolishment of the monarchy in form of that done with the first French republic.
It has to be able to actually 'think' in order to do that, and this type of software is completely incapable of 'thinking',
No... It doesn't have to "think" to do that, nor would I expect a computer to "think" in the same sense as human thinking. I would simply expect the vehicle to detect the path of oncoming traffic, and take any necessary correction to not enter that path in spite of confusing road markings. It just means a more-nuanced "decision tree" as you call it.
If there's active traffic, people will avoid it. But there are plenty of times that human drivers get confused by road markings
Yes.... But machines are supposed to be BETTER. Before self-driving cars are ready, they must be able to avoid jumping into the same lane as active oncoming traffic while traveling down a road or highway, even if the road markings are confusing or in error.
I like my job too, but if they ask me to do something unethical I don't care if I get fired on the spot, not happening.
You can say that for yourself, but you cannot say that for other people.
My suggestion would be that we change the "whistle blower" laws... right now whistle blowers are merely protected for disclosing illegal activity ordered by management, or that management is aware of --- the laws should change so that a whistleblower is not merely protected but actually rewarded - A minimum fine should be due for any corporate rulebreaking, and the reward should be... I would suggest 8 to 10 times that employee's normal yearly wage, either way, their reward should be funded to be a large enough jackpot to offset any loss due to possible retaliation.
"We continue to believe modular computing is a market where there are many opportunities for innovation." while the other side says they will no longer develop new Compute Cards."
So, which is it Intel?
I'm not sure.... but Intel did just screw over any businesses who bought into the hardware that uses compute cards for investment protection with the expectation that the compute card model would basically guarantee future upgradeability (The major promise of modular computing!).
Can't trust that promise when its controlled by one vendor (Intel), because Intel just discontinued any possibility of future upgrades to that hardware, and now the people who bought that hardware are screwed, since upgrading will now require a complete forklift.
After getting screwed like that; businesses should not be so trusting of Intel's next "modular" solution either.
Its most likely just cronyism --- that's part of why it might not seem to "make sense" - members of both Left and Right parties are cronies of (different) corporations. Some business(es) or special interests that are harmed by the e-cigs industry, are no doubt lobbying and/or pushing their bought and paid for politicians (Or friends/relatives in politics) for this sort of ban.
The timestamps have to be in sync because ATM transactions interact with other servers at the bank
Two clocks are never perfectly in sync -- there is always some tolerance for clock skew, even with SSL, etc; most likely 3 to 5 minutes. In any event, there's no technical requirement that the Cameras timestamps be in sync with the Bank network for the ATMs to function --- the timestamp on the camera could be X minutes ahead or behind the ATM's timestamp.
What you have there is more DisInformation, FUD, and unfounded fears about China's social "credit". The credit Scores
(that's plural, not one score), are actually penalizing People who are bad passengers and violating rules and courtesy while using the public transportation specifically with restriction on the use of public transportation services.
This is not "Because you have wrongthink, you can't take the train to work tomorrow" -- Instead, this is, for example: Because you got on the train without a ticket recently and tried to sneak by, but got caught. Or you started a fight with another passenger, or loitered in front of the boarding gate repeatedly, or you were found smoking in a labelled no-smoking area at the train station --- You can become banned from the facility by this automated system.
For "spreading fake news" about airport security, you can lose your ability to purchase tickets.
China also had a social credit system for pet owners tried in Jinan: Pet owners that commit violations such as letting your animal cause public disturbances or run free without a leash lose points, and if you run out of points, then your dog gets impounded.
This can happen in the US as well.... Dogs found without a leash or license get impounded; maybe in (SOME) cases the owner can reclaim by paying a fine -- but that's up to the authorities, and not always.
The security personnel can ban you from Rail/Bus/Airport facilities for misbehavior. The social credit system with its various credit scores about different things works similarly.
The "hottest" isotopes are of the LEAST concern at this point -- the ones that remain are still dangerous. The Ice wall is Not even perfectly watertight. The corium will have radioactivity hazardous to humans and the environment for hundreds of years... the water will contact it and become contaminated, and that contamination will spread into the soil and into the oceans and cause massive long-term damage.
it's not like we voted to make EU domains only four members of the EU oh wait yes we did that's exactly what we voted for.
It doesn't matter too much what people historically voted for. The EU TLD is not the property of any country or government; although it was was designated for those associated some way with the EU. Technically, every ccTLD is the property of the internet community as a whole, and each ccTLD is delegated to a TLD manager, but that is just whoever happens to apply for it first, submit certain proof of their qualifications to run the TLD, and earn ICANN approval.
If ICANN wishes, they can revoke the EU TLD manager's approval based on their intention to cancel UK companies' domains, and award management of the ccTLD to a new administrator --- the TLD's policies then change to whatever the new administrator's policies are, and could include worldwide registration if the new manager wanted.
Just because some govt entity or SJW claims it's a disease doesn't make it so.
Webster's dictionary defines disease as a condition of the living animal or plant body or of one of its parts
that impairs normal functioning and is typically manifested by distinguishing signs and symptoms : SICKNESS, MALADY
In other words, just because mental illness doesn't spread directly from person to person doesn't mean that it is not a disease. Public health problems are within the CDC's purview, and that includes suicides. Public health also includes factors causing injuries to a large number of people --- this is DIFFERENT from product safety: in that product safety are more proactive in looking at possible risks and hazards in consumer products before such product can even possibly become a Public Health issue... the CDC is more concerned about matters that are already becoming Public Health problems, and Occupational matters, which are not even addressed by other agencies ---- The scooters are considered "safe" as a product, they pass product safety standards, but the CDC notices they are becoming a public health issue anyways, and the CDC has a legitimate role in studying the matter. Product safety commissions may later take CDC research findings into account.
You can look at data from the CDC themself to see that such matters as suicides and depression are major public health issues, and rates continue to get worse and worse. They are suddenly worth studying, and their finding of a five fold increase in suicides based on the mere presence of a gun in a household would certainly seem to make mitigating/reducing guns causing suicides are a legitimate issue for the CDC to pursue.
There are about 340,000 registered British holders of these web addresses, and the government has urged them to make contingency plans as their web addresses will disappear
The ccTLDs are to be used for the benefit of the unit they were issued before --- But having 340,000 legit domains' being purged is a major dereliction of Registries' obligation to utilize policies and procedures that provide for a stable internet registry.
Probably the best outcome would be to revoke the EU ccTLD from its current registry/administrator, and re-assign the management of the TLD who will preserve all registrations and administer the registry in a manner that will not unnecessarily destabilize the internet DNS namespace.
gun deaths are a disease as well, in some sense --- although there is a federal law prohibiting the CDC's researchers from publishing in support of gun control.
And there's some research noting the "mere presence of a gun in a home increased the risk of a firearm-related death by 2.7 percent, and suicide fivefold
In response to research outcomes the NRA didn't like? In response, the NRA launched a "campaign to shut down the (CDC's) Injury Center."
The CDC is a Public Health Agency, and their mission includes the prevention of injury and disability as well; the CDC are also involved in addressing public health concerns related to environmental health, occupational safety, health promotion, and injury prevention. For example, they provide information about Obesity and Diabetes, even though these are not considered infectious disease.
Clerk: How would you like to pay? Customer: Credit card? Clerk: OK. Your total is $25.99 after discounts.
Clerk: How would you like to pay? Customer: I have Cash here. Clerk: OK; there's an extra $100 checkout fee that is only discounted if paying by card, so Your total is $125.99
these days, apps like Twitter are just a combination of common technologies that happen to be available on mobile phones now
That does Not mean those companies are in the clear -- the technologies putting them in the clear would ONLY happen if BB had exhausted their patent rights by licensing those "common technologies" to Apple/Google Android/etc for use on their phones ---- since use is unlicensed, BB have the option to pursue anyone who uses those technologies instead. The "common" technologies available on mobile phones can be a copy of Blackberry's inventions, and those companies building on top of them would then be responsible to know and license the tech from the patent holder before building a product that utilizes those technologies.
Nobody needed (or wanted) to study how Blackberry did it to implement the newer services.
Also irrelevent.... the patent protects the invention, which can be "obvious" to other people AFTER they have seen the invention or a derivative of the invention in action or learned about the basics of what the invention achieved. In any case, the ability of other people to re-create an invention without studying its implementation does not render the invention or its implementation non-patentable.
At one time, they were a practicing patent holder. Now they are a troll.
BB are still a practicing patent holder. They have products such as Blackberry Connect and BlackBerry Spark Communications Services -- that provides APIs for developers to build instant messaging and collaboration applications, etc.
Part of the whole point of patent exclusivity is to provide protection for the fact that once people saw and interacted with BB's software, "once people knew of the product", the operation and aspects of functional user interface were easy to re-create.
Fact of the matter is BB created one of the first instant messaging apps (BBM), which still exists (albeit in evolved form) to this day, and patent protection provides for preventing people from using their app --- apprehending how such an app likely works, and then creating and selling their own version, which seems like what Twitter mobile functionality does.
Are the patents legitimate or did they sneak BS through the PTO?
They have so many of them, and only a couple of their claims were invalidated or dismissed as patent-ineligible in the court cases with Snapchat/Facebook despite Snap/FB's arguments to dismiss many more of them : so its kind of a tough argument to say so many patents "sneaked" by the patent examiners.
713 : Handheld electronic device and associated method providing time data in a messaging environment 327 : System and method for determining action spot locations relative to the location of a mobile device 084 : System and method for determining action spot locations relative to the location of a mobile device 634 : Previewing a new event on a small screen device 351 : System and method for pushing information to a mobile device 929 : System and method for pushing information to a mobile device 120 : System and method for silencing notifications for a message thread 236 : Transmission of status updates responsive to status of recipient application 250 : System and method for switching between an instant messaging conversation and a game in progress
Facebook brings this action against BlackBerry for infringement of
U.S. Patent No. 8,429,231 (“’231 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,567,575 (“’575 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 6,356,841 (“’841 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,228,432 (“’432 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 6,744,759 (“’759 patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 7,302,698 (“’698 patent”) (collectively “the Patents-in-Suit”).
231: Voice instant messaging 575 : Personalized multimedia services using a mobile service platform 841: G.P.S. management system
432: Method and apparatus for providing security for a computer system
759: System and method for providing user-configured telephone service in a data network telephony system
698 : Operation of trusted state in computing platform
Patent, not copyright.
And Blackberry does not meet the typical definition of troll -- Blackberry was a practicing entity that was there first and patented some of the methods they were using, but they were then out-innovated by more software-heavy companies like Apple and Google... Twitter is not something Blackberry would have developed, because BB saw itself as a phone maker, at least until very recently.
Anyways, they're not a "troll" per se, but in their desperate condition BB needs to maximize revenue from every source possible, so they turn to licensing their patent portfolio.
"Troll" implies Blackberry is at fault, But in fact --- it is OUR patent system at fault: if companies like Blackberry are being allowed to hold patents on software system or feature designs that are broad or so obvious that its something any skilled developer would come up with when faced with a challenge, rather than only patentable substantial developments that significantly add to the state of the art.
For example if a new parent starts buying baby things, and looking for books on child health, do these books get suggested?
Its entirely possible. If it doesn't happen today, then it could happen tomorrow. Perhaps one way people can have their say is that pro-vaccers could borrow the content from another source, such as a library, or borrow or buy a used copy from someone who already owns the book (To avoid purchasing on Amazon and contributing to boosting sales of product), and then write Helpful 1-star Reviews on Amazon that eloquently detail issues with the books.
Amazon's recommendations engine is based on statistical techniques that are in general called "Machine Learning".
In general, their goal is to make the recommendations that maximize Amazon's revenue, in other words: they try to predict which categories of items the shopper would be most likely to purchase, and from there... there's some kind of priority based on the price of the item and Amazon's expected revenue from selling that item, so as to prefer recommendations that make more $$$ for Amazon.
However, they can make changes to the system at any time, and learning algorithms vary their behavior over time as well.
Books are important for Free Speech. And its important that booksellers don't generally censor content.
If people are suggesting Amazon stifle anti-vacc publications, then they are suggesting something Very Dangerous, because next time it may be censoring political speech people disagree with -- for example Anti-Trump or Pro-Trump books.
If you want to mitigate the problem of Anti-vacc publications in search results, then maybe write some Pro-Vaccine books.
It seems the anti-vacc people are VIGILANT and active, and most of the Pro-vacc people are Lazy and inactive or do little, Despite the systemic risk The Pro-Vacc people need to become aware that anti-vacc people are a danger to them, because people who aren't vaccinated get diseases, and the effective rate of vaccines is not 100%, AND those diseases once they're spreading more can evolve/mutate such that the vaccine is no longer effective, so everyone has reasons to fear from results of people believing the Anti-Vacc movement folks.
The Pro-Vaccers simply need to get organized and start writing some books AND countering every move by anti-vaccers
How about requiring people who want to review the movie to snapshot their ticket stub with an app on their phone?
Or if you got the DVD, then take a picture of the box.
Slashdot Mirror
It will be interesting to find out exactly what was in the contract. That will come out in the lawsuit,
You're assuming NG didn't throw in a binding arbitration clause together with their general Disclaimer of Warranty and Force Majeure covering unexpected situations such as a GPS Rollover as part of the client onboarding.
Citizens must sue the city and file for an emergency injunction!
Injunction from a court has zero weight over the emergency powers of government executives.
(The emergency executive powers override any court issuances while the ordinary civil order is suspended)
Because security in IT terms is not an absolute. It's a compromise. If you want to be secure switch off your fucking computer.
Based on that argument...... Chrome should eliminate HTTPS certificate verification support, accept any connection presented by default, and make that an optional Add-On that has to be installed; Rejecting old versions of SSL such as SSLv3 would also be an Optional Addon similar to the option to shut off scripting... because Security in IT terms is not an absolute, and verifying TLS connections has nothing to do with processing HTTP requests.
It's an outdated concept, a relic from when we we're uncivilized.
I agree they're outdated, but they are also a nice reminder of tradition, And
usually they have the candor to stay out of political matters.
If the latter changes, then I would firmly suggest a democratic revolution and abolishment of the monarchy in form of that done with the first French republic.
It has to be able to actually 'think' in order to do that, and this type of software is completely incapable of 'thinking',
No... It doesn't have to "think" to do that, nor would I expect a computer to "think" in the same sense as human thinking.
I would simply expect the vehicle to detect the path of oncoming traffic, and take any necessary correction to not enter that path in spite of confusing road markings.
It just means a more-nuanced "decision tree" as you call it.
If there's active traffic, people will avoid it. But there are plenty of times that human drivers get confused by road markings
Yes.... But machines are supposed to be BETTER. Before self-driving cars are ready, they must be able to avoid jumping into the same lane as active oncoming traffic while traveling down a road or highway, even if the road markings are confusing or in error.
I like my job too, but if they ask me to do something unethical I don't care if I get fired on the spot, not happening.
You can say that for yourself, but you cannot say that for other people.
My suggestion would be that we change the "whistle blower" laws... right now whistle blowers are merely protected for disclosing illegal activity ordered by management, or that management is aware of --- the laws should change so that a whistleblower is not merely protected but actually rewarded - A minimum fine should be due for any corporate rulebreaking, and the reward should be... I would suggest 8 to 10 times that employee's normal yearly wage, either way, their reward should be funded to be a large enough jackpot to offset any loss due to possible retaliation.
"We continue to believe modular computing is a market where there are many opportunities for innovation." while the other side says they will no longer develop new Compute Cards."
So, which is it Intel?
I'm not sure.... but Intel did just screw over any businesses who bought into the hardware that uses compute cards for investment protection with the expectation that the compute card model would basically guarantee future upgradeability (The major promise of modular computing!).
Can't trust that promise when its controlled by one vendor (Intel), because Intel just discontinued any possibility of future upgrades to that hardware, and now the people who bought that hardware are screwed, since upgrading will now require a complete forklift.
After getting screwed like that; businesses should not be so trusting of Intel's next "modular" solution either.
Its most likely just cronyism --- that's part of why it might not seem to "make sense" - members of both Left and Right parties are cronies of (different) corporations. Some business(es) or special interests that are harmed by the e-cigs industry, are no doubt lobbying and/or pushing their bought and paid for politicians (Or friends/relatives in politics) for this sort of ban.
The timestamps have to be in sync because ATM transactions interact with other servers at the bank
Two clocks are never perfectly in sync -- there is always some tolerance for clock skew, even with SSL, etc; most likely 3 to 5 minutes.
In any event, there's no technical requirement that the Cameras timestamps be in sync with the Bank network for the ATMs to function --- the timestamp on the camera could be X minutes ahead or behind the ATM's timestamp.
What you have there is more DisInformation, FUD, and unfounded fears about China's social "credit". The credit Scores
(that's plural, not one score), are actually penalizing People who are bad passengers and violating rules and courtesy while using the public transportation specifically with restriction on the use of public transportation services.
This is not "Because you have wrongthink, you can't take the train to work tomorrow" -- Instead, this is, for example: Because you got on the train without a ticket recently and tried to sneak by, but got caught. Or you started a fight with another passenger, or loitered in front of the boarding gate repeatedly, or you were found smoking in a labelled no-smoking area at the train station --- You can become banned from the facility by this automated system.
For "spreading fake news" about airport security, you can lose your ability to purchase tickets.
China also had a social credit system for pet owners tried in Jinan: Pet owners that commit violations such as letting your animal cause public disturbances or run free without a leash lose points, and if you run out of points, then your dog gets impounded.
This can happen in the US as well.... Dogs found without a leash or license get impounded; maybe in (SOME) cases the owner can reclaim by paying a fine -- but that's up to the authorities, and not always.
The security personnel can ban you from Rail/Bus/Airport facilities for misbehavior. The social credit system with its various credit scores about different things works similarly.
The "hottest" isotopes are of the LEAST concern at this point -- the ones that remain are still dangerous. The Ice wall is Not even perfectly watertight. The corium will have radioactivity hazardous to humans and the environment for hundreds of years... the water will contact it and become contaminated, and that contamination will spread into the soil and into the oceans and cause massive long-term damage.
it's not like we voted to make EU domains only four members of the EU oh wait yes we did that's exactly what we voted for.
It doesn't matter too much what people historically voted for. The EU TLD is not the property of any country or government; although it was was designated for those associated some way with the EU. Technically, every ccTLD is the property of the internet community as a whole, and each ccTLD is delegated to a TLD manager, but that is just whoever happens to apply for it first, submit certain proof of their qualifications to run the TLD, and earn ICANN approval.
If ICANN wishes, they can revoke the EU TLD manager's approval based on their intention to cancel UK companies' domains, and award management of the ccTLD to a new administrator --- the TLD's policies then change to whatever the new administrator's policies are, and could include worldwide registration if the new manager wanted.
Just because some govt entity or SJW claims it's a disease doesn't make it so.
Webster's dictionary defines disease as a condition of the living animal or plant body or of one of its parts
that impairs normal functioning and is typically manifested by distinguishing signs and symptoms : SICKNESS, MALADY
In other words, just because mental illness doesn't spread directly from person to person doesn't mean that it is not a disease. Public health problems are within the CDC's purview, and that includes suicides. Public health also includes factors causing injuries to a large number of people --- this is DIFFERENT from product safety: in that product safety are more proactive in looking at possible risks and hazards in consumer products before such product can even possibly become a Public Health issue... the CDC is more concerned about matters that are already becoming Public Health problems, and Occupational matters, which are not even addressed by other agencies ---- The scooters are considered "safe" as a product, they pass product safety standards, but the CDC notices they are becoming a public health issue anyways, and the CDC has a legitimate role in studying the matter. Product safety commissions may later take CDC research findings into account.
You can look at data from the CDC themself to see that such matters as suicides and depression are major public health issues, and rates continue to get worse and worse. They are suddenly worth studying, and their finding of a five fold increase in suicides based on the mere presence of a gun in a household would certainly seem to make mitigating/reducing guns causing suicides are a legitimate issue for the CDC to pursue.
There are about 340,000 registered British holders of these web addresses, and the government has urged them to make contingency plans as their web addresses will disappear
The ccTLDs are to be used for the benefit of the unit they were issued before --- But having 340,000 legit domains' being purged is a major dereliction of Registries' obligation to utilize policies and procedures that provide for a stable internet registry.
Probably the best outcome would be to revoke the EU ccTLD from its current registry/administrator, and re-assign the management of the TLD who will preserve all registrations and administer the registry in a manner that will not unnecessarily destabilize the internet DNS namespace.
gun deaths are a disease as well, in some sense --- although there is a federal law prohibiting the CDC's researchers from publishing in support of gun control.
And there's some research noting
the "mere presence of a gun in a home increased the risk of a firearm-related death by 2.7 percent, and suicide fivefold
In response to research outcomes the NRA didn't like? In response, the NRA launched a "campaign to shut down the (CDC's) Injury Center."
The CDC is a Public Health Agency, and their mission includes the prevention of injury and disability as well; the CDC are also involved in addressing public health concerns related to environmental health, occupational safety, health promotion, and injury prevention.
For example, they provide information about Obesity and Diabetes, even though these are not considered infectious disease.
Clerk: How would you like to pay? Customer: Credit card?
Clerk: OK. Your total is $25.99 after discounts.
Clerk: How would you like to pay?
Customer: I have Cash here.
Clerk: OK; there's an extra $100 checkout fee that is only discounted if paying by card, so Your total is $125.99
these days, apps like Twitter are just a combination of common technologies that happen to be available on mobile phones now
That does Not mean those companies are in the clear -- the technologies putting them in the clear would ONLY happen if BB had exhausted their patent rights by licensing those "common technologies" to Apple/Google Android/etc for use on their phones ---- since use is unlicensed, BB have the option to pursue anyone who uses those technologies instead. The "common" technologies available on mobile phones can be a copy of Blackberry's inventions, and those companies building on top of them would then be responsible to know and license the tech from the patent holder before building a product that utilizes those technologies.
Nobody needed (or wanted) to study how Blackberry did it to implement the newer services.
Also irrelevent.... the patent protects the invention, which can be "obvious" to other people AFTER they have seen the invention or a derivative of the invention in action or learned about the basics of what the invention achieved. In any case, the ability of other people to re-create an invention without studying its implementation does not render the invention or its implementation non-patentable.
At one time, they were a practicing patent holder. Now they are a troll.
BB are still a practicing patent holder. They have products such as Blackberry Connect and
BlackBerry Spark Communications Services -- that provides APIs for developers to build instant messaging and collaboration applications, etc.
Part of the whole point of patent exclusivity is to provide protection for the fact that once people saw and interacted with BB's software, "once people knew of the product", the operation and aspects of functional user interface were easy to re-create.
Fact of the matter is BB created one of the first instant messaging apps (BBM), which still exists (albeit in evolved form) to this day,
and patent protection provides for preventing people from using their app --- apprehending how such an app likely works, and then creating and selling their own version, which seems like what Twitter mobile functionality does.
Are the patents legitimate or did they sneak BS through the PTO?
They have so many of them, and only a couple of their claims were invalidated or dismissed as
patent-ineligible in the court cases with Snapchat/Facebook despite Snap/FB's arguments to dismiss many more of them : so its kind of a tough argument to say so many patents "sneaked" by the patent examiners.
Snapchat v Blackberry - Ruling on Snapchat's motion to dismiss pursuant to frcp 12(B)(6) [24]:
713 : Handheld electronic device and associated method providing time data in a messaging environment
327 : System and method for determining action spot locations relative to the location of a mobile device
084 : System and method for determining action spot locations relative to the location of a mobile device
634 : Previewing a new event on a small screen device
351 : System and method for pushing information to a mobile device
929 : System and method for pushing information to a mobile device
120 : System and method for silencing notifications for a message thread
236 : Transmission of status updates responsive to status of recipient application
250 : System and method for switching between an instant messaging conversation and a game in progress
Facebook brings this action against BlackBerry for infringement of
U.S. Patent No. 8,429,231 (“’231 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,567,575 (“’575 patent”),
U.S. Patent No. 6,356,841 (“’841 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 7,228,432 (“’432 patent”),
U.S. Patent No. 6,744,759 (“’759 patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 7,302,698 (“’698 patent”) (collectively “the Patents-in-Suit”).
231: Voice instant messaging
575 : Personalized multimedia services using a mobile service platform
841: G.P.S. management system
432: Method and apparatus for providing security for a computer system
759: System and method for providing user-configured telephone service in a data network telephony system
698 : Operation of trusted state in computing platform
Patent, not copyright.
And Blackberry does not meet the typical definition of troll -- Blackberry was a practicing entity that was there first and patented some of the methods they were using, but they were then out-innovated by more software-heavy companies like Apple and Google...
Twitter is not something Blackberry would have developed, because BB saw itself as a phone maker, at least until very recently.
Anyways, they're not a "troll" per se, but in their desperate condition BB needs to maximize revenue from every source possible, so they turn to licensing their patent portfolio.
"Troll" implies Blackberry is at fault, But in fact --- it is OUR patent system at fault: if companies like Blackberry are being allowed to hold patents on software system or feature designs that are broad or so obvious that its something any skilled developer would come up with when faced with a challenge, rather than only patentable substantial developments that significantly add to the state of the art.
For example if a new parent starts buying baby things, and looking for books on child health, do these books get suggested?
Its entirely possible. If it doesn't happen today, then it could happen tomorrow.
Perhaps one way people can have their say is that pro-vaccers could borrow the content from another source, such as a library,
or borrow or buy a used copy from someone who already owns the book
(To avoid purchasing on Amazon and contributing to boosting sales of product), and then write Helpful 1-star Reviews on Amazon that
eloquently detail issues with the books.
Amazon's recommendations engine is based on statistical techniques that are in general called "Machine Learning".
In general, their goal is to make the recommendations that maximize Amazon's revenue, in other words: they try to predict
which categories of items the shopper would be most likely to purchase, and from there... there's some kind of priority based on
the price of the item and Amazon's expected revenue from selling that item, so as to prefer recommendations that make more $$$ for Amazon.
However, they can make changes to the system at any time, and learning algorithms vary their behavior over time as well.
Books are important for Free Speech. And its important that booksellers don't generally censor content.
If people are suggesting Amazon stifle anti-vacc publications, then they are suggesting something Very Dangerous,
because next time it may be censoring political speech people disagree with -- for example Anti-Trump or Pro-Trump books.
If you want to mitigate the problem of Anti-vacc publications in search results, then maybe write some Pro-Vaccine books.
It seems the anti-vacc people are VIGILANT and active, and most of the Pro-vacc people are Lazy and inactive or do little, Despite
the systemic risk
The Pro-Vacc people need to become aware that anti-vacc people are a danger to them, because
people who aren't vaccinated get diseases, and the effective rate of vaccines is not 100%, AND those diseases once they're spreading
more can evolve/mutate such that the vaccine is no longer effective, so everyone has reasons to fear from results of people believing the Anti-Vacc movement folks.
The Pro-Vaccers simply need to get organized and start writing some books AND countering every move by anti-vaccers
How about requiring people who want to review the movie to snapshot their ticket stub with an app on their phone?
Or if you got the DVD, then take a picture of the box.