I don't know of a single case where Microsoft has sued anyone initially for patent infringement, though there are several where Microsoft has counter-sued after first being sued. Come to think of it, I don't think those were patent suits either, but copyright infringement (MS v. Stac, for instance)
Exactly. They see patents as more like protection from other people suing them. I guarentee you nobody's going to start paying royalties for using FAT in their software. =P
Of course, maybe redhat will chicken out and remove FAT support from fedora. Ugh.
I was walking down the street the other day, and I saw an insane fat man screaming at the top of his lungs and sweating like a pig. I instantly felt a passion for developers welling up from deep inside of me.
Even though microsoft has a huge patent portfolio, this won't make a bit of difference for anyone. Microsoft doesn't generally enforce the patents it does have. I believe they keep them more as a protection against other companies.
Does anyone know of any major lawsuit where microsoft actually tried to have a patent upheld?
Why should you punish your best submitters, even if they are doing it for their own benefit (URL on a popular site)?
Because it's not punishment. It's exactly what nofollow is for. Even if they're a good submitter, that doesn't necessarily mean that their pagerank should be boosted. If you post the link to the website, that's ok. Slashdot submitters can click on it, and they know why it's there. Google doesn't. If a slashdot user clicks on the user's website, and says "hey, that's a cool website", and adds a link to it from their webpage, then *that* actually means something about the site's usefulness.
It seems to me that *not* nofollowing every link is abusing pagerank.
Am I the only one who doesn't think that that's very clearly a triple star from the pictures? =P The title of the article made it look like the light we see from it is actually from three really close together stars...but it seems like we're only seem polaris A, since the smaller ones are so tiny.
No, they're able to produce Stem Cells without using animal proteins, which means that they don't have to remove the contaminating proteins after it's cultured. This doesn't change anything wrt the debate about if it's right - which is primarily over the fact that the most useful stem cells still come from aborted fetuses, which nearly all anti-abortion advocates think is immoral.
Chinese scientists have made amazing advances in enabling multiple births, for those Chinese people who want to have twins. Iranian scientists have also genetically modified a pig so that it will reproduce and grow at 5 times the normal rate. Iran's hunger problems will surely end soon.
Well, there are certain circumstances where it makes sense - if you're not sure where you want the project to go, but you want to give people the benefit of your code for right now. If you opensource it, you're pretty much condemning any potential you had for making money off of the code. Of course, there are those on this forum that would claim that that's wrong...but it's still a valid reason to keep your source proprietary.
I have a friend who did something similar to this with a computer. (Bought a few cheaper consoles like Sega Saturn as well) - wanted to be able to play any game from any console. I don't think he got them all, but it's cool that now someone's marketing it all in one package.
Now if only they would get rid of the almost 1Ghz allocated to fixed-point communications, like satellite communications, and maritime and aeronautical navigation. I wish they would force them to use their spectrum more wisely instead of forcing something that everyone uses to be crammed into a tiny space. (Satellite should be using UWB - they have to have dishes anyway - they can afford to receive a signal that is just above the background signal strength)
I'm glad that someone is finally standing up for the horribly broken, outdated patent system. Maybe this will increase public awareness, and open the door to better software innovations.
Exactly, that's also why a matches stop burning immediately when you no longer rub them.
Tornados are not anything like hurricanes, they are sustained by the super cell above them, whereas hurricanes are self-sustaining, and driven by the energy from the warm moist air. The vortexes as described by the papers require energy to keep them going from below. If you shut down the power plant, the vortex would very quickly dissipate.
"what happens if a nuclear reactor blows up?", call me stupid, but why is this a stupid question?
A nuclear reactor cannot blow up like a nuclear bomb (maybe my statement was unclear). Chernobyl "blew up" in the sense that the coolant failed and the heat built up to the point that things got out of hand - but any "blowing up" that happened was just steam busting pipes and stuff. The nuclear material used in reactors is not pure enough to fission fast enough to actually blow up itself.
A nuclear reactor is in just as much danger of blowing up as any other type of power plant - the only difference is that if you have a problem with a coal plant, you just have coal dust everywhere, and everyone gets dirty. If you have a problem with a nuclear power plant, you get radioactive material everywhere, and everyone grows extra limbs.
"What happens if one of these tornados gets away?"
This question is about as ignorant as "what happens if a nuclear reactor blows up?" A vortex created and sustained by the energy from the tower wouldn't be able to escape - if it did, it would have no energy source to sustain itself.
But it also begs the question: why doesn't Microsoft extend that same logic to operating systems or applications?
Well, they are pretty open about the APIs and formats now - they're opening up the office 12, and they have extensive documentation of all external APIs. If you're talking about source code, it's obviously not a logical exension at all.
Slashdot readership is not an elite, it's just an assembly of geeks. The up-modding of your article just means that some random readers found it insightful; nothing more, nothing less. It's not a medal or a decoration
That's true. I guess my point, though, is that moderating doesn't actually pull much more insightful comments to the top. You could probably write a bot that would do as good of a job of pulling insightful comments up, just by analyzing word length and grammatical construction.
Slashdot Mirror
"MS FAT" sounds like a ghastly 700-pound woman beauty pagent you would see on ESPN3 at 4am.
I don't know of a single case where Microsoft has sued anyone initially for patent infringement, though there are several where Microsoft has counter-sued after first being sued. Come to think of it, I don't think those were patent suits either, but copyright infringement (MS v. Stac, for instance)
Exactly. They see patents as more like protection from other people suing them. I guarentee you nobody's going to start paying royalties for using FAT in their software. =P
Of course, maybe redhat will chicken out and remove FAT support from fedora. Ugh.
They finally patented Steve Ballmer.
I was walking down the street the other day, and I saw an insane fat man screaming at the top of his lungs and sweating like a pig. I instantly felt a passion for developers welling up from deep inside of me.
I can't explain it.
Even though microsoft has a huge patent portfolio, this won't make a bit of difference for anyone. Microsoft doesn't generally enforce the patents it does have. I believe they keep them more as a protection against other companies.
Does anyone know of any major lawsuit where microsoft actually tried to have a patent upheld?
Patent portfolio "licensing" (i.e. suing) companies' stock prices just fell through the floor. =P
Why should you punish your best submitters, even if they are doing it for their own benefit (URL on a popular site)?
Because it's not punishment. It's exactly what nofollow is for. Even if they're a good submitter, that doesn't necessarily mean that their pagerank should be boosted. If you post the link to the website, that's ok. Slashdot submitters can click on it, and they know why it's there. Google doesn't. If a slashdot user clicks on the user's website, and says "hey, that's a cool website", and adds a link to it from their webpage, then *that* actually means something about the site's usefulness.
It seems to me that *not* nofollowing every link is abusing pagerank.
Am I the only one who doesn't think that that's very clearly a triple star from the pictures? =P The title of the article made it look like the light we see from it is actually from three really close together stars...but it seems like we're only seem polaris A, since the smaller ones are so tiny.
What can we expect from those who expound on academic freedom so much?
Would you care to espouse what you mean by that?
Were the professors and students unnamed in his blog, or are they just keeping them unnamed for the article?
No, they're able to produce Stem Cells without using animal proteins, which means that they don't have to remove the contaminating proteins after it's cultured. This doesn't change anything wrt the debate about if it's right - which is primarily over the fact that the most useful stem cells still come from aborted fetuses, which nearly all anti-abortion advocates think is immoral.
Chinese scientists have made amazing advances in enabling multiple births, for those Chinese people who want to have twins. Iranian scientists have also genetically modified a pig so that it will reproduce and grow at 5 times the normal rate. Iran's hunger problems will surely end soon.
Well, there are certain circumstances where it makes sense - if you're not sure where you want the project to go, but you want to give people the benefit of your code for right now. If you opensource it, you're pretty much condemning any potential you had for making money off of the code. Of course, there are those on this forum that would claim that that's wrong...but it's still a valid reason to keep your source proprietary.
I gotta admit, I...just don't care. I haven't seen a google post today. Wake me up when there is one.
I have a friend who did something similar to this with a computer. (Bought a few cheaper consoles like Sega Saturn as well) - wanted to be able to play any game from any console. I don't think he got them all, but it's cool that now someone's marketing it all in one package.
Now if only they would get rid of the almost 1Ghz allocated to fixed-point communications, like satellite communications, and maritime and aeronautical navigation. I wish they would force them to use their spectrum more wisely instead of forcing something that everyone uses to be crammed into a tiny space. (Satellite should be using UWB - they have to have dishes anyway - they can afford to receive a signal that is just above the background signal strength)
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf
I bet this really stupid post gets modded up to a 5. chumps.
I'm glad that someone is finally standing up for the horribly broken, outdated patent system. Maybe this will increase public awareness, and open the door to better software innovations.
So, why are true water spouts a threat to land? Momentum.
I could be wrong, but I think water has a bit more momentum than air. =P
Exactly, that's also why a matches stop burning immediately when you no longer rub them.
Tornados are not anything like hurricanes, they are sustained by the super cell above them, whereas hurricanes are self-sustaining, and driven by the energy from the warm moist air. The vortexes as described by the papers require energy to keep them going from below. If you shut down the power plant, the vortex would very quickly dissipate.
"what happens if a nuclear reactor blows up?", call me stupid, but why is this a stupid question?
A nuclear reactor cannot blow up like a nuclear bomb (maybe my statement was unclear). Chernobyl "blew up" in the sense that the coolant failed and the heat built up to the point that things got out of hand - but any "blowing up" that happened was just steam busting pipes and stuff. The nuclear material used in reactors is not pure enough to fission fast enough to actually blow up itself.
A nuclear reactor is in just as much danger of blowing up as any other type of power plant - the only difference is that if you have a problem with a coal plant, you just have coal dust everywhere, and everyone gets dirty. If you have a problem with a nuclear power plant, you get radioactive material everywhere, and everyone grows extra limbs.
"What happens if one of these tornados gets away?"
This question is about as ignorant as "what happens if a nuclear reactor blows up?" A vortex created and sustained by the energy from the tower wouldn't be able to escape - if it did, it would have no energy source to sustain itself.
But it also begs the question: why doesn't Microsoft extend that same logic to operating systems or applications?
Well, they are pretty open about the APIs and formats now - they're opening up the office 12, and they have extensive documentation of all external APIs. If you're talking about source code, it's obviously not a logical exension at all.
Youths vandalize giant mirror, killed by angry mob of suicidal depressed villiagers.
You missed the joke. It said first draft.
Slashdot readership is not an elite, it's just an assembly of geeks. The up-modding of your article just means that some random readers found it insightful; nothing more, nothing less. It's not a medal or a decoration
That's true. I guess my point, though, is that moderating doesn't actually pull much more insightful comments to the top. You could probably write a bot that would do as good of a job of pulling insightful comments up, just by analyzing word length and grammatical construction.