Patenting something like the GIF encoding algorithm nowadays would be extremely difficult.
Seeing as GIF (and the LZW compression which was the patented part of it) could be claimed as prior art, I would certainly hope so. Unfortunately, what I've seen of the current patent system still makes me somewhat skeptic about how that would work out.
And what does that wireless connection connect to? At some point in the connection, there will always be wires. They're faster and typically more reliable. So even if user devices all connect to the network wirelessly, the access points will almost always be connected phyically somehow.
Have you ever heard of caching? In theory, if the binary code hasn't changed, then if the NaCl module is cached properly, you'd only have to download it the first time. Of course, you'd have to redownload it anytime it changes on the server, but look at it this way - you get instant access to updates.
And if you read the article, Google's purpose in this is not to create huge, full applications in native code and then run them through the browser, but combine this native calculations with the cloud. In Photoshop, that might mean your computer's GPU handles all the image processing, but all the data to save and export to different formats is sent to the cloud for processing. Or, Google Docs' spreadsheets could offload all the cell formula calculations in native code, rather than sending a request back to the server. The point of this native code is to speed up lots of little actions, not build entire applications.
Nope, and that's why NP-complete problems are currently not calculable (at least not in the true, best case scenario, unless you get really lucky and your algorithm succeeds on an early attempt). The concept of a nondeterministic Turing machine is basically that you have a machine that as it goes along to solve the problem, can instantaneously split itself into multiple copies to try to calculate different paths along the algorithm.
If it helps, picture it like a hypothetical infinite core processor. Every time the algorithm hits a branch (if, switch, that kind of idea), rather than simply choose one of them to follow, it creates a copy of itself on another core and each copy starts going through one of the paths. On our limited and finite machines, this gets impossibly large very quickly (think lots of recursion). So if they really did prove P=NP, that's a major leap for Computer Science. But it's still hard to believe, seeing how many other people have spent so long trying.
Um...you can keep 'compressing' things in whatever algorithm (gzip, zip, rar, mp3, whatever), but eventually it won't make the file any smaller at all. All compression does is replace repeated sequences with a key to replace it and strip those duplicates out. As soon as the file lacks that sequenciality, there is no more stuff that can be simplified. And even if you could, the processor power to continuous decompress it out of all those recursive compressions would kill the battery life of any smartphone.
In short, you could NOT replicate what Google search does on hundreds of dedicated servers, with only a cell phone and an SD card.
Ooo! That could be a fun improvement! In years to come it could just be made out of active uranium, and then you won't even need all those thousands of light bulbs!
Wow, that's changed from when I bought mine. Sorry about the misinformation there - when I bought mine (CS3, so things might have changed) from my school, I had to sign some thing saying I wouldn't use it for commercial use.
Heck, you could put together a simple website for a local business and your costs are recovered.
Except for the fact that the student editions licensing restrictions stating you are not to use it for commercial (aka, freelance) purposes. And I've had friends try to upgrade from a student to a full version to be able to do freelance work, but Adobe's upgrade options from the student edition really don't refund you a high percentage of what you originally paid. And if you don't care about ignoring that licensing restriction, what's going to stop you from just pirating the software in the first place?
While this is true that one of the main purposes of the Church's work in genealogy is to perform baptisms for the dead, the way you've said it ignores a key point. The LDS (Mormon) Church's policy is to only allow baptism to be performed for the dead when a family member specifically requests it. If you are not comfortable with this, then you don't have to allow it. And PAF itself doesn't upload to the Church's main databases. FamilySearch.org and its tools can be used to locate information about ancestors, and if you want, you can only take things, and not submit additional information. Speaking as a Mormon, we don't want, nor ever have wanted, to offend anyone, either of our faith or not. And as the Church has invested lots of time and effort, we'd like to share that with anyone that would like.
According to the article, practically the only reason given as for why Google and Apple should give access to these APIs is to be patriotic. But as a few other people have pointed out, Google and Apple, though based in the US, are no longer solely US companies. What would this article's opinion have been had Russia or China or some other countries equivalent Department of Defense had asked for access to these APIs I wonder?
...thereby also rendering them useless on buses, trains, trams, and after falling off cliffs, all of which are other perfectly reasonable times to make and receive phone calls.
Slashdot Mirror
Patenting something like the GIF encoding algorithm nowadays would be extremely difficult.
Seeing as GIF (and the LZW compression which was the patented part of it) could be claimed as prior art, I would certainly hope so. Unfortunately, what I've seen of the current patent system still makes me somewhat skeptic about how that would work out.
Crazy it may be, but unfortunately, with the quality of most of the tech reps I've talked with, all too true.
And yet you're still here....
And what does that wireless connection connect to? At some point in the connection, there will always be wires. They're faster and typically more reliable. So even if user devices all connect to the network wirelessly, the access points will almost always be connected phyically somehow.
...but not open source.
Aluminum foil, right?
But then how's Apple going to make its proprietary implementation of the stuff and give it a name?
Don't you mean grammar check?
No, Google's the one with a magical, self driving car nowadays.
Have you ever heard of caching? In theory, if the binary code hasn't changed, then if the NaCl module is cached properly, you'd only have to download it the first time. Of course, you'd have to redownload it anytime it changes on the server, but look at it this way - you get instant access to updates.
And if you read the article, Google's purpose in this is not to create huge, full applications in native code and then run them through the browser, but combine this native calculations with the cloud. In Photoshop, that might mean your computer's GPU handles all the image processing, but all the data to save and export to different formats is sent to the cloud for processing. Or, Google Docs' spreadsheets could offload all the cell formula calculations in native code, rather than sending a request back to the server. The point of this native code is to speed up lots of little actions, not build entire applications.
Nope, and that's why NP-complete problems are currently not calculable (at least not in the true, best case scenario, unless you get really lucky and your algorithm succeeds on an early attempt). The concept of a nondeterministic Turing machine is basically that you have a machine that as it goes along to solve the problem, can instantaneously split itself into multiple copies to try to calculate different paths along the algorithm.
If it helps, picture it like a hypothetical infinite core processor. Every time the algorithm hits a branch (if, switch, that kind of idea), rather than simply choose one of them to follow, it creates a copy of itself on another core and each copy starts going through one of the paths. On our limited and finite machines, this gets impossibly large very quickly (think lots of recursion). So if they really did prove P=NP, that's a major leap for Computer Science. But it's still hard to believe, seeing how many other people have spent so long trying.
Obviously, the government took them.
Um...you can keep 'compressing' things in whatever algorithm (gzip, zip, rar, mp3, whatever), but eventually it won't make the file any smaller at all. All compression does is replace repeated sequences with a key to replace it and strip those duplicates out. As soon as the file lacks that sequenciality, there is no more stuff that can be simplified. And even if you could, the processor power to continuous decompress it out of all those recursive compressions would kill the battery life of any smartphone.
In short, you could NOT replicate what Google search does on hundreds of dedicated servers, with only a cell phone and an SD card.
Ooo! That could be a fun improvement! In years to come it could just be made out of active uranium, and then you won't even need all those thousands of light bulbs!
Wow, that's changed from when I bought mine. Sorry about the misinformation there - when I bought mine (CS3, so things might have changed) from my school, I had to sign some thing saying I wouldn't use it for commercial use.
Heck, you could put together a simple website for a local business and your costs are recovered.
Except for the fact that the student editions licensing restrictions stating you are not to use it for commercial (aka, freelance) purposes. And I've had friends try to upgrade from a student to a full version to be able to do freelance work, but Adobe's upgrade options from the student edition really don't refund you a high percentage of what you originally paid. And if you don't care about ignoring that licensing restriction, what's going to stop you from just pirating the software in the first place?
While this is true that one of the main purposes of the Church's work in genealogy is to perform baptisms for the dead, the way you've said it ignores a key point. The LDS (Mormon) Church's policy is to only allow baptism to be performed for the dead when a family member specifically requests it. If you are not comfortable with this, then you don't have to allow it. And PAF itself doesn't upload to the Church's main databases. FamilySearch.org and its tools can be used to locate information about ancestors, and if you want, you can only take things, and not submit additional information. Speaking as a Mormon, we don't want, nor ever have wanted, to offend anyone, either of our faith or not. And as the Church has invested lots of time and effort, we'd like to share that with anyone that would like.
Well, I just skimmed it, but it didn't make anything clearer. What I get from it and understand is this:
Does this one require 3D glasses too?
Real criminals use .doc.
According to the article, practically the only reason given as for why Google and Apple should give access to these APIs is to be patriotic. But as a few other people have pointed out, Google and Apple, though based in the US, are no longer solely US companies. What would this article's opinion have been had Russia or China or some other countries equivalent Department of Defense had asked for access to these APIs I wonder?
Murray said that police have no leads on who put the robot there, or why they did it.
Ten to one odds say they were bored and wanted to see what would happen.
...thereby also rendering them useless on buses, trains, trams, and after falling off cliffs, all of which are other perfectly reasonable times to make and receive phone calls.