Hardly. These people act against anyone. It's an insult to even the underground.
Someone smashes your car, what do you do? Do you plan attack against the local post-office or do you get back at the guy who smashed your car?
They have a problem with our politics, let them go after our politicians. God knows we have enough of them (and pay quite a bit to protect them). Instead these people try get across some sort of idiotic political statement by attacking random people and places. "Hey Abdul, there's a day-care center, let's go shoot it up, glory to Allah!". Fucking idiots. When you begin attacking like the above, don't be surprised when a nuke is sent your way.
This is like Evil fighting Evil. On one hand you have the RIAA with copyright IP, and the other you have Altnet with patent IP. The RIAA has the money, but a patent is a WMD.
The courts are going to be screwed with this case: if they rule for the RIAA, they are effectively that copyright is more powerful than patents; on the otherhand, going with the status quo, they could rule for Altnet, which means not only can the RIAA not pursue copyright infringers on Kazaa, but they could be torched with Eolas-class fines (think $500+ million).
Who do I think will win? Altnet. MS, IBM, SUN and others care more for patent protection than copyright protection, and their money will speak.
Re:It's called IP for a reason
on
Is IP Property?
·
· Score: 1
Brilliant. So instead of the people holding power (everyone has a say in the laws, etc.), you instead vest that power in a representative. And they would never dream of using that power for their own purposes. And this differs from democracy how?
I think the problem with our government began with the 16th amendmant which basically said: "Whatever we want, whenever we want it." You're no longer the master, you're the slave.
Re:It's called IP for a reason
on
Is IP Property?
·
· Score: 1
Well, think about it. Under democracy and all that, the will of the majority be done. This includes copying the creator's work, taxing the creator's work, and denying the creator's work exists. Whatever works, justified by the (para)phrase: "For the good of the many, a few must suffer." Rights never enter the equation.
Experience has taught us otherwise. Congress has a mandate: tax until you scream. So it would be you paying full fare (what you usually pay) + corporations paying full fare. The end result is not lowered taxes, but more 'programs'.
Why does a road crew need 30 people? You have 2 guys holding the flags ("Slow, Traffic"), 5 guys to roll the asphalt around, and maybe 4 guys to work the machines. Total: 11 people.
Instead they're all sitting around, drinking their coffee. I drive back from the stores (30 min later), they're still drinking it. Must be one good brew.
Not that I mind slacking, but with the build up of suburbanites (huge developments, one and two lane roads, low-cost housing), the roads are clogged with minivans come 8 AM. It's great, if I don't make it out the door by 7 AM, I call the office, and let them know I'll be in around noon. I then go and watch a movie (instead of sitting in traffic).
What you have to understand is that they have doubled the amount of lanes (on the roads), but they haven't gotten around to painting them yet. They just drink their coffee, and wave us on...
Hardly. I think it's more of a short-hand for United States of American. Just shorten to American, as I do not know of any other country which includes America in their name.
Of course there is USAsian, but that is more recent.
Open up the white market for organs. Make it profitable to sell your kidneys. Hell, even when Uncle Joe dies pennyless, he can leave you something. When such things become profitable, you would be amazed how many people are willing to *donate*.
Life isn't fair. But I'd rather have the market determine fairness than some committee that claims to be "fair and impartial". In the first case, you need money. In the second case, you need to be the nephew of the person on the board.
Which system would you prefer? One that bases fairness on cash, or the other which bases fairness on being related to the guy at the top?
And lastly, who is to say that one person's life is worth more than another's. No matter how much time is left, it is the right of that person to fight for their life. Anything less is inhuman.
Best Quote ever (Babylon 5): "Life isn't fair. But what if it were? What if we really did deserve all those horrible, nasty things that happened to us? And that is why I take great solace in the fact that life isn't fair"
I don't know...Sonic 3 felt so...trashy compared to the first two. Yes, better graphics, but the gameplay was much less enjoyable. And whoever did the music needs to be shot.
Sonic & Knuckles-> better than Sonic 3, not quite on par with the previous two. Close, but it was missing something.
And as an earlier poster said, kill Knuckles. It's like that Simpson's episode where Homer voices a new character for Itchy & Scratchy. "Knuckles-> Yay! He's new, cool, and badass. He has dreadlocks, what more could you want?" How about a game that doesn't suck, and doesn't need an extra character to give it a boost. We already have Tails, he can fly, not glide.
nhtsa-> government agency. Take with a grain of salt. My father is a forensic pathologist/biophysics engineer, and his firm laughs at some of the stuff nhtsa puts out.
If you want a car to be safe, tell the car companies to stop skimping on the safety regs. My father handled a case where Ford screwed uo again, shaving a few hundred off the construction of the Explorer's roll cage. The end result was 4 dead, 1 in a coma, and 2 in critical condition in a side collision. Matchbox effect-> the roof went from a rectangle to a rhombus (if I remember geometry correctly). Nasty stuff.
Because these large vehicles are safer, people will prefer them. If you want them to feel safe in smaller cars, make sure the smaller cars are safe. A Volvo, BMW, and Benz (of any size) will hold up well in almost any collision. They are just well constructed. A Ford, Toyota, Nissan will not. So, when considering their brands, bigger is better.
Hey, at the time, BUILD was great. Something severely lacking in DOOM: the ability to jump. Makes for all sorts of fun.
But what made the cake was the combination of all the vice elements in one game. Aliens, guns, women (hookers), liquor, bad singing (hilarious)... and yet he is supposed to be the all American hero. It's like Vice City, before its time.
And unlike most games, it has definite replay value. Take Warcraft 2, how many times can you play the game before you're bored? And yet, with Duke3D, no matter how many times you play, it is soooo satisfying to pump a few shotgun shells into a pig cop.
From what I've read on 3DRealms (DNF), they keep adding features (skeletal animation, etc.). But by the time they go "Hey, we're done", a new engine is out. So they swap to the new engine add a little more, wash, rinse, repeat. It does not help that Duke3D's following is so great that anything less than an incredible game will land them in trouble.
Larger crumple zones. Less chance of submarining. Lots of fun stuff like that. Just comparing energy doesn't take into account impulse and other factors.
A Land Cruiser and a Explorer get in a crash, the occupants will be relatively unharmed (assuming head-on collision, 45 MPH, light traffic). A Celica and a Talon get into a crash, the occupants are going to the hospital in critical condition.
Putting aside gas-mileage and visibility for other drivers, the main problem with SUVs of any great size is center of gravity. This is also true of minivans. They are more likely to tip when accelerating in any direction other than forward.
Solar-powered vehicles will become popular when 1.) they can prove that they are more efficent than gas-powered cars (think of the amount of energy in manufacturing the cells, load capacity of the car, etc.) and 2.) when they are as safe as other vehicles. This vehicle is like the Ford Model A: matched up against even an Echo, it's going to die. Bring it up to speed with the regs, or it will never fly.
And WTF does a Hummer have to do with this story? Hummers (aside from gas mileage) are some of the safest vehicles out there, and incredibly comfortable: that's kind of why Arnold drives one, he's a big guy and needs a big car. The story says the solar car crossed lanes into oncoming traffic (hello!). Even in a hummer, that would be rough.
More of a hobby, when I'm downstairs waxing the BMWs (2 325xi, 1 740il). I have an x3 on loan, can't decide between it or an x5 (x5 is more luxurious, but the x3 is more sporty).
4 hours = biking. 30 min = driving (a KIA). 13 min = driving a BMW.
That's assuming traffic (there's something called a passing lane, might want to check into that). Without traffic, the BMW time drops to 11 min. The KIA's time can't be helped (lots of curves, have to slowdown to avoid going into a field). BMW doesn't blink. The Ford (Taurus) holds up better than the KIA, and that's a station wagon.
Course, that's just to the main office. When you factor in driving to clients, satellite offices, lunch, you find a BMW can save you an hour or so a day. Well worth the investment, and an absolute pleasure to drive.
And if the speed limits were 10-20MPH, there's no need to buy a car. You can ride a bike.
Wait, wait, if you lower them to 1-5MPH (no running), you don't have to buy anything at all! You can just walk.
You see, there are two reasons we typically buy cars: 1.) for fun, 2.) for profit (the whole getting from one place to another ties in here). The whole "getting from one place to another" argument fits in here, but these are the primary reasons behind it all.
You probably have a job, and that job probably is a couple of miles from your home. Putting aside urban centers, you most likely need a car to get there. So, assuming you have a job of any worth, getting to the office in 30 minutes versus 4 hours means more money in your pocket.
Now, some of us like our voyage to be...comfortable? Stylish? Safe? Entertaining? So, we invest in those Benzes and Bimmers, for fun and for profit!
Who says that driving a car has to be a chore? After a long, hard day of work, I like to relax by climbing in my car, and taking it for a cruise. Helps relieve the tension. Makes life more tasteful, so much fuller. Less a passenger in life, more a driver.
As for my self-worth (or rather, the worth of myself), you'll find it's tied up in the banks. No sense carrying it around (too much shuffling about in the car: very distracting), though the weight of the greenbacks does help with the RWD.
At 45 MPH, a KIA or GEO is topping out (safety wise). At 80 MPH, a BMW or Benz begins to enter the yellow (safety) zone. A good driver is someone who knows his/her vehicle and is aware of the surrounding environment/driving conditions.
All those people who scream about lowering "speed limits" as a way to save the children, let me point this out: cars today are built to withstand 40MPH crashes. Consequently, car companies find ways to make cars cheaper, but not safer (will survive 40 MPH crash, not a 45 MPH crash). They only need to satisfy the one limit.
Raise the speed limits and the safety limits of cars rise (now you can survive a 60MPH crash). Are cars safer? Yes. Are people happier that they can drive faster? Yes.
Are roads safer? Arguably, yes. When before Ms. Airhead would talk to her friends in 45MPH traffic, at 80MPH her attention is focused on the task at hand: driving. Why? Scientists can't explain, but it appears the faster you go, the more attention you pay to your surroundings. Something about the whole self-preservation thing that just completely overrides any social programming you might experience.
Hmm. An atom may be immutable through chemical means, but by other (physics-based) means, you can accomplish as much.
From what I gather, changing a lead atom into a gold atom requires the removal of a few (n/p/e)s, where electrons are the easiest, and neutrons are the hardest. The process (at current) would be extremely energy intensive (so you lose money), but opens up the possibilities to other realms (cracking the atoms of DNA).
Ok, this is new. I'm all for intellectual property (stupid patents aside), but ownership of an idea in another man's head?
You know what? I claim ownership to the word Spoon, the number 7, and any references to a Screaming Yellow Platypus (or its relatives). And if any of you mention the above, it's off to jail with you.
All funny business aside, this is just sick. Mr. Mannalow, please be advised that not only do we own any thoughts that come out of your head, now we own the ones on the inside as well. We 0wn you now.
Curious. How does society inspire an idea? Do a group of people suddenly gasp with the collective creation of a new idea? Or is it a single individual who comes up with a new idea, and then shares it?
And what if society stands in the way of this new idea? What if society impedes progress by attempting to make everyone equal? Can I sue society? Can I sue you?
I've filed an application, and at current rates, it will take 5+ years before it issues. This is because 'Society' deemed in necessary to transfer operational money from the USPTO to Social Security. I had to earn $670 to file a $380 application with a $20 Express mailing. Why? Because 'Society' wanted $270 for f*cking taxes (income, etc.).
I worked my ass off earning $8/hour, in a manufacturing job (wood products), in middle of f*cking August with no a/c to pay for my application. I did not get any 'help' from 'Society'; in fact, I was impeded by you idiots. "For the children" and "For the good of the people" bullsh*t. Get off your fat ass, quit complaining about your life, and actually do something.
We live in a Lockian society. It's the basis for our constitution; actually, the founding fathers were accused on plagarism because they copied so much. You get 10 basic (negative) rights, and are told to fend for yourself; none of this shiny happy people thing. If you cannot respect other people's life, liberty, and property: Leave!
[Article] Maybe the owners of those patents have a leg to stand, maybe they don't. But wandering around going "Pfft, prior art" without referencing anything serves no purpose. It's purely reactionary, and no matter how many times you say "Patents are stupid," the courts are going to laugh at you, and move it along. Reason works, activism doesn't.
School == Socialistic Institution. It doesn't matter who thought of it first, it gets distributed equally.
Also, require an implementation to be submitted along with patent applications (to help prevent patenting things to prevent others from doing it).
You just described the whole point behind a patent: the ability to restrict others.
Or, if you ABSOLUTELY cling to the idea that greed is the only way anything will ever get done, at the very least shorten terms to the point that patents aren't so lucrative that they're considered the only important thing about doing business.
How about this: we keep the patent system the way it is, but actually let the system KEEP the fees it collects. I mean, WTF is Congress doing siphoning funds off of them anyway? Paying for Social Security and other failed programs. This whole situation could be summed up in a single line: "Sacrificing your future (technology) to pay for gramp's past (SS, Medicare, etc.)".
The sad part is, paired with Avalon, this patent app could (will) lead to infringement by MS on one of my patents. I'm being deathly serious about this.
Aright, off to talk to the lawyer, and pick out what island I want;).
First problem: getting the state involved. Think of PA as Florida, but without the beach. PA is a dying state. The old people here are in decline (they outnumber us, and want benefits). So basically, major companies are moving out of Philadelphia because they are getting the living sh*t taxed out of them.
The mayor of Philly, Street, recently raised the commuter tax. Not a good idea (many people travel from the suburbs via SEPTA to work in Philadelphia).
The situation can be summed up as this: there are not enough (major) companies left in Philly to jump start the citie's economy. And the administrators are not giving up their grip on taxing and regulating, prefering a bait-and-switch tactics which are fooling no one. But they believe these tactics will work (and nothing can change their views apparently).
The old people want their benefits, but the young population isn't fooled either. So they are moving out as well.
It pretty sad when there is a ton of property to be developed (in Philly), but there is sooo much red-tape that no one can get the license to begin building. It's even worse when companies move across the river (Cambden), to a state (NJ) with even higher taxes, because Cambden is doing the right thing (tax-incentives).
Having the mayor Street proclaim that the "city is owned by the Brothers" doesn't help things either.
I know I'm responding to a troll, but what the hell.
Do you know why the cops don't arrest everyone on the block? Because they are scared. After the sun sets, Center City and University City are the only places worth hanging around (ratio of cops:people can be 1:5 at times). I've lived in Philly for a number of years, and some Ambulances will simply not drive into West Philly after dark. It's not worth it to them.
Now, I am not condemning the majority of people living there. But there are sections that are infested. I believe there was an incident a few years back where the mayor simply let the city burn (anti-terrorist squad dropped a bomb (literally), started a big fire).
For that matter, West Philly is the only place I've been chased out of (young, stupid, new to Philly, drunk). Got on the El (going the wrong way), got off at 69th street (out of money, spent it all on beer). Nothing opens your eyes like being chased by crazies (as the people who live their call them) out of the West. And you think white people are racist? Damn, nothing like white kid running from a bunch of middle-aged black guys carrying bats and ranting about "Cracker...white man going to have his day...holding us down."
I hated Track in high school (middle distance/sprinter), but sprinting full out, I gained a newfound respect for my old coach. I got back to Center City very, very sober.
Slashdot Mirror
Hardly. These people act against anyone. It's an insult to even the underground.
Someone smashes your car, what do you do? Do you plan attack against the local post-office or do you get back at the guy who smashed your car?
They have a problem with our politics, let them go after our politicians. God knows we have enough of them (and pay quite a bit to protect them). Instead these people try get across some sort of idiotic political statement by attacking random people and places. "Hey Abdul, there's a day-care center, let's go shoot it up, glory to Allah!". Fucking idiots. When you begin attacking like the above, don't be surprised when a nuke is sent your way.
This is like Evil fighting Evil. On one hand you have the RIAA with copyright IP, and the other you have Altnet with patent IP. The RIAA has the money, but a patent is a WMD.
The courts are going to be screwed with this case: if they rule for the RIAA, they are effectively that copyright is more powerful than patents; on the otherhand, going with the status quo, they could rule for Altnet, which means not only can the RIAA not pursue copyright infringers on Kazaa, but they could be torched with Eolas-class fines (think $500+ million).
Who do I think will win? Altnet. MS, IBM, SUN and others care more for patent protection than copyright protection, and their money will speak.
Brilliant. So instead of the people holding power (everyone has a say in the laws, etc.), you instead vest that power in a representative. And they would never dream of using that power for their own purposes. And this differs from democracy how?
I think the problem with our government began with the 16th amendmant which basically said: "Whatever we want, whenever we want it." You're no longer the master, you're the slave.
Well, think about it. Under democracy and all that, the will of the majority be done. This includes copying the creator's work, taxing the creator's work, and denying the creator's work exists. Whatever works, justified by the (para)phrase: "For the good of the many, a few must suffer." Rights never enter the equation.
You'd think that, wouldn't you...
Experience has taught us otherwise. Congress has a mandate: tax until you scream. So it would be you paying full fare (what you usually pay) + corporations paying full fare. The end result is not lowered taxes, but more 'programs'.
And here I thought it was me...
Why does a road crew need 30 people? You have 2 guys holding the flags ("Slow, Traffic"), 5 guys to roll the asphalt around, and maybe 4 guys to work the machines. Total: 11 people.
Instead they're all sitting around, drinking their coffee. I drive back from the stores (30 min later), they're still drinking it. Must be one good brew.
Not that I mind slacking, but with the build up of suburbanites (huge developments, one and two lane roads, low-cost housing), the roads are clogged with minivans come 8 AM. It's great, if I don't make it out the door by 7 AM, I call the office, and let them know I'll be in around noon. I then go and watch a movie (instead of sitting in traffic).
What you have to understand is that they have doubled the amount of lanes (on the roads), but they haven't gotten around to painting them yet. They just drink their coffee, and wave us on...
Hardly. I think it's more of a short-hand for United States of American. Just shorten to American, as I do not know of any other country which includes America in their name.
Of course there is USAsian, but that is more recent.
Why not?
Open up the white market for organs. Make it profitable to sell your kidneys. Hell, even when Uncle Joe dies pennyless, he can leave you something. When such things become profitable, you would be amazed how many people are willing to *donate*.
Life isn't fair. But I'd rather have the market determine fairness than some committee that claims to be "fair and impartial". In the first case, you need money. In the second case, you need to be the nephew of the person on the board.
Which system would you prefer? One that bases fairness on cash, or the other which bases fairness on being related to the guy at the top?
And lastly, who is to say that one person's life is worth more than another's. No matter how much time is left, it is the right of that person to fight for their life. Anything less is inhuman.
Best Quote ever (Babylon 5): "Life isn't fair. But what if it were? What if we really did deserve all those horrible, nasty things that happened to us? And that is why I take great solace in the fact that life isn't fair"
"A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," from foreign enemies, and from tyranny.
I don't know...Sonic 3 felt so...trashy compared to the first two. Yes, better graphics, but the gameplay was much less enjoyable. And whoever did the music needs to be shot.
Sonic & Knuckles-> better than Sonic 3, not quite on par with the previous two. Close, but it was missing something.
And as an earlier poster said, kill Knuckles. It's like that Simpson's episode where Homer voices a new character for Itchy & Scratchy. "Knuckles-> Yay! He's new, cool, and badass. He has dreadlocks, what more could you want?" How about a game that doesn't suck, and doesn't need an extra character to give it a boost. We already have Tails, he can fly, not glide.
nhtsa-> government agency. Take with a grain of salt. My father is a forensic pathologist/biophysics engineer, and his firm laughs at some of the stuff nhtsa puts out.
If you want a car to be safe, tell the car companies to stop skimping on the safety regs. My father handled a case where Ford screwed uo again, shaving a few hundred off the construction of the Explorer's roll cage. The end result was 4 dead, 1 in a coma, and 2 in critical condition in a side collision. Matchbox effect-> the roof went from a rectangle to a rhombus (if I remember geometry correctly). Nasty stuff.
Because these large vehicles are safer, people will prefer them. If you want them to feel safe in smaller cars, make sure the smaller cars are safe. A Volvo, BMW, and Benz (of any size) will hold up well in almost any collision. They are just well constructed. A Ford, Toyota, Nissan will not. So, when considering their brands, bigger is better.
Hey, at the time, BUILD was great. Something severely lacking in DOOM: the ability to jump. Makes for all sorts of fun.
But what made the cake was the combination of all the vice elements in one game. Aliens, guns, women (hookers), liquor, bad singing (hilarious)... and yet he is supposed to be the all American hero. It's like Vice City, before its time.
And unlike most games, it has definite replay value. Take Warcraft 2, how many times can you play the game before you're bored? And yet, with Duke3D, no matter how many times you play, it is soooo satisfying to pump a few shotgun shells into a pig cop.
From what I've read on 3DRealms (DNF), they keep adding features (skeletal animation, etc.). But by the time they go "Hey, we're done", a new engine is out. So they swap to the new engine add a little more, wash, rinse, repeat. It does not help that Duke3D's following is so great that anything less than an incredible game will land them in trouble.
Larger crumple zones. Less chance of submarining. Lots of fun stuff like that. Just comparing energy doesn't take into account impulse and other factors.
A Land Cruiser and a Explorer get in a crash, the occupants will be relatively unharmed (assuming head-on collision, 45 MPH, light traffic). A Celica and a Talon get into a crash, the occupants are going to the hospital in critical condition.
Putting aside gas-mileage and visibility for other drivers, the main problem with SUVs of any great size is center of gravity. This is also true of minivans. They are more likely to tip when accelerating in any direction other than forward.
Solar-powered vehicles will become popular when 1.) they can prove that they are more efficent than gas-powered cars (think of the amount of energy in manufacturing the cells, load capacity of the car, etc.) and 2.) when they are as safe as other vehicles. This vehicle is like the Ford Model A: matched up against even an Echo, it's going to die. Bring it up to speed with the regs, or it will never fly.
And WTF does a Hummer have to do with this story? Hummers (aside from gas mileage) are some of the safest vehicles out there, and incredibly comfortable: that's kind of why Arnold drives one, he's a big guy and needs a big car. The story says the solar car crossed lanes into oncoming traffic (hello!). Even in a hummer, that would be rough.
More of a hobby, when I'm downstairs waxing the BMWs (2 325xi, 1 740il). I have an x3 on loan, can't decide between it or an x5 (x5 is more luxurious, but the x3 is more sporty).
4 hours = biking.
30 min = driving (a KIA).
13 min = driving a BMW.
That's assuming traffic (there's something called a passing lane, might want to check into that). Without traffic, the BMW time drops to 11 min. The KIA's time can't be helped (lots of curves, have to slowdown to avoid going into a field). BMW doesn't blink. The Ford (Taurus) holds up better than the KIA, and that's a station wagon.
Course, that's just to the main office. When you factor in driving to clients, satellite offices, lunch, you find a BMW can save you an hour or so a day. Well worth the investment, and an absolute pleasure to drive.
And if the speed limits were 10-20MPH, there's no need to buy a car. You can ride a bike.
Wait, wait, if you lower them to 1-5MPH (no running), you don't have to buy anything at all! You can just walk.
You see, there are two reasons we typically buy cars: 1.) for fun, 2.) for profit (the whole getting from one place to another ties in here). The whole "getting from one place to another" argument fits in here, but these are the primary reasons behind it all.
You probably have a job, and that job probably is a couple of miles from your home. Putting aside urban centers, you most likely need a car to get there. So, assuming you have a job of any worth, getting to the office in 30 minutes versus 4 hours means more money in your pocket.
Now, some of us like our voyage to be...comfortable? Stylish? Safe? Entertaining? So, we invest in those Benzes and Bimmers, for fun and for profit!
Who says that driving a car has to be a chore? After a long, hard day of work, I like to relax by climbing in my car, and taking it for a cruise. Helps relieve the tension. Makes life more tasteful, so much fuller. Less a passenger in life, more a driver.
As for my self-worth (or rather, the worth of myself), you'll find it's tied up in the banks. No sense carrying it around (too much shuffling about in the car: very distracting), though the weight of the greenbacks does help with the RWD.
Excellent point.
At 45 MPH, a KIA or GEO is topping out (safety wise). At 80 MPH, a BMW or Benz begins to enter the yellow (safety) zone. A good driver is someone who knows his/her vehicle and is aware of the surrounding environment/driving conditions.
All those people who scream about lowering "speed limits" as a way to save the children, let me point this out: cars today are built to withstand 40MPH crashes. Consequently, car companies find ways to make cars cheaper, but not safer (will survive 40 MPH crash, not a 45 MPH crash). They only need to satisfy the one limit.
Raise the speed limits and the safety limits of cars rise (now you can survive a 60MPH crash). Are cars safer? Yes. Are people happier that they can drive faster? Yes.
Are roads safer? Arguably, yes. When before Ms. Airhead would talk to her friends in 45MPH traffic, at 80MPH her attention is focused on the task at hand: driving. Why? Scientists can't explain, but it appears the faster you go, the more attention you pay to your surroundings. Something about the whole self-preservation thing that just completely overrides any social programming you might experience.
Hmm. An atom may be immutable through chemical means, but by other (physics-based) means, you can accomplish as much.
From what I gather, changing a lead atom into a gold atom requires the removal of a few (n/p/e)s, where electrons are the easiest, and neutrons are the hardest. The process (at current) would be extremely energy intensive (so you lose money), but opens up the possibilities to other realms (cracking the atoms of DNA).
Actually, I was making reference to Lo Wang: Shadow Warrior (game by 3DRealms), but that works.
Ok, this is new. I'm all for intellectual property (stupid patents aside), but ownership of an idea in another man's head?
You know what? I claim ownership to the word Spoon, the number 7, and any references to a Screaming Yellow Platypus (or its relatives). And if any of you mention the above, it's off to jail with you.
All funny business aside, this is just sick. Mr. Mannalow, please be advised that not only do we own any thoughts that come out of your head, now we own the ones on the inside as well. We 0wn you now.
Curious. How does society inspire an idea? Do a group of people suddenly gasp with the collective creation of a new idea? Or is it a single individual who comes up with a new idea, and then shares it?
And what if society stands in the way of this new idea? What if society impedes progress by attempting to make everyone equal? Can I sue society? Can I sue you?
I've filed an application, and at current rates, it will take 5+ years before it issues. This is because 'Society' deemed in necessary to transfer operational money from the USPTO to Social Security. I had to earn $670 to file a $380 application with a $20 Express mailing. Why? Because 'Society' wanted $270 for f*cking taxes (income, etc.).
I worked my ass off earning $8/hour, in a manufacturing job (wood products), in middle of f*cking August with no a/c to pay for my application. I did not get any 'help' from 'Society'; in fact, I was impeded by you idiots. "For the children" and "For the good of the people" bullsh*t. Get off your fat ass, quit complaining about your life, and actually do something.
We live in a Lockian society. It's the basis for our constitution; actually, the founding fathers were accused on plagarism because they copied so much. You get 10 basic (negative) rights, and are told to fend for yourself; none of this shiny happy people thing. If you cannot respect other people's life, liberty, and property: Leave!
[Article] Maybe the owners of those patents have a leg to stand, maybe they don't. But wandering around going "Pfft, prior art" without referencing anything serves no purpose. It's purely reactionary, and no matter how many times you say "Patents are stupid," the courts are going to laugh at you, and move it along. Reason works, activism doesn't.
Also, require an implementation to be submitted along with patent applications (to help prevent patenting things to prevent others from doing it).
You just described the whole point behind a patent: the ability to restrict others.
Or, if you ABSOLUTELY cling to the idea that greed is the only way anything will ever get done, at the very least shorten terms to the point that patents aren't so lucrative that they're considered the only important thing about doing business.
How about this: we keep the patent system the way it is, but actually let the system KEEP the fees it collects. I mean, WTF is Congress doing siphoning funds off of them anyway? Paying for Social Security and other failed programs. This whole situation could be summed up in a single line: "Sacrificing your future (technology) to pay for gramp's past (SS, Medicare, etc.)".
I need a drink.
The sad part is, paired with Avalon, this patent app could (will) lead to infringement by MS on one of my patents. I'm being deathly serious about this.
;).
Aright, off to talk to the lawyer, and pick out what island I want
First problem: getting the state involved. Think of PA as Florida, but without the beach. PA is a dying state. The old people here are in decline (they outnumber us, and want benefits). So basically, major companies are moving out of Philadelphia because they are getting the living sh*t taxed out of them.
The mayor of Philly, Street, recently raised the commuter tax. Not a good idea (many people travel from the suburbs via SEPTA to work in Philadelphia).
The situation can be summed up as this: there are not enough (major) companies left in Philly to jump start the citie's economy. And the administrators are not giving up their grip on taxing and regulating, prefering a bait-and-switch tactics which are fooling no one. But they believe these tactics will work (and nothing can change their views apparently).
The old people want their benefits, but the young population isn't fooled either. So they are moving out as well.
It pretty sad when there is a ton of property to be developed (in Philly), but there is sooo much red-tape that no one can get the license to begin building. It's even worse when companies move across the river (Cambden), to a state (NJ) with even higher taxes, because Cambden is doing the right thing (tax-incentives).
Having the mayor Street proclaim that the "city is owned by the Brothers" doesn't help things either.
For those who've lived in Philly (as a college student).
:) (if you live down there, you know).
Pasquallys rocks
I know I'm responding to a troll, but what the hell.
Do you know why the cops don't arrest everyone on the block? Because they are scared. After the sun sets, Center City and University City are the only places worth hanging around (ratio of cops:people can be 1:5 at times). I've lived in Philly for a number of years, and some Ambulances will simply not drive into West Philly after dark. It's not worth it to them.
Now, I am not condemning the majority of people living there. But there are sections that are infested. I believe there was an incident a few years back where the mayor simply let the city burn (anti-terrorist squad dropped a bomb (literally), started a big fire).
For that matter, West Philly is the only place I've been chased out of (young, stupid, new to Philly, drunk). Got on the El (going the wrong way), got off at 69th street (out of money, spent it all on beer). Nothing opens your eyes like being chased by crazies (as the people who live their call them) out of the West. And you think white people are racist? Damn, nothing like white kid running from a bunch of middle-aged black guys carrying bats and ranting about "Cracker...white man going to have his day...holding us down."
I hated Track in high school (middle distance/sprinter), but sprinting full out, I gained a newfound respect for my old coach. I got back to Center City very, very sober.