On a related note, did you hear that the Bush administration now says that bird flu is nothing to worry about? More to the point, for bird flu to be a threat to humans, it would have to evolve, and everyone knows evolution is just a theory!
No, actually, if you bothered to read the patent you linked to, Oracle has patented:
1. A method of identifying groups within an Identity System of which a user of the Identity System is a member, the method comprising: determining a set of groups of which the user is a static member based on a group identity profile for each of one or more groups within the Identity System, wherein the group identity profile for each of the one or more groups within the Identity System defines static members of the group; determining a set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member based on the group identity profile for each of the one or more groups within the Identity System, wherein the group identity profile for each of the one or more groups within the Identity System further defines a rule for determining dynamic members of the group; combining the set of groups of which the user is a static member and the set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member; determining a set of groups of which the user is a nested member based on the combined set of groups of which the user is a static member and set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member by recursively finding one or more containing groups for the combined set of groups of which the user is a static member and set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member to a predetermined level of nesting; and reporting the set of groups of which the user is a static member, the set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member, and the set of groups of which the user is a nested member.
1. The patent relies on 44 claims, most of which can easily be shown to be prior art. (Ironically, WebCT, which was bought out by BlackBoard might be used as a counterexample of prior art).
Each claim stands or falls on its own. In other words, if a competitor is infringing just *one* of those claims, it doesn't matter whether every other claim is invalidated.
3. To violate the Patent you would have to be substantially equivalent. Essentially this means someone would have to substantially rely on Blackboard's look and feel for providing LMS services.
The infringing product only has to be substantially equivalent to what is CLAIMED. Blackboard's specific implementation is completely irrelevant to the patent, unless the details of that implementation are actually recited in the claims.
4. The patent heavily relies on the concept of "files" - like our old system, which used flat files for information management (no, we did not and could not develop for the then popular (1998-1999) Sun + Oracle combo -- too big and too expensive for us and most schools at the time). An LMS using a Relational Database may be sufficiently different enough in implementation.
How are relational databases implemented? See "substantially equivalent" above. Also, while I haven't read the claims, I suspect plenty of them are completely silent WRT to file-based implementation.
5. The patent differention seems to be at this part:
"The present invention also enhances the prior art by providing a flexible infrastructure for colleges, universities, and other institutions wishing to facilitate on-line registration and tuition payment. More specifically, the present invention can accommodate different billing methods, including, but not limited to, billing on a per-credit-hour basis, and billing on a per-registrant basis."
Again, a patent is all about what is CLAIMED. Unless this sentence is recited in the claims, it will most likely be irrelevant to any patent litigation.
That's the broadest independent claim. I think if you look at the dependent claims, you'll start seeing more points of novelty. The independent claims are usually overly agressive to begin with...
Every time a patent is mentioned on Slashdot, the same misunderstandings crop up over and over and over...
This is not a PATENT. It's a patent application PUBLICATION... which means the application has filed, but hasn't been examined yet (and probably won't be for about 2 more years).
Just because a patent is filed doesn't mean it will be granted.
The substance of the patent is in the claims. This is what Microsoft thinks (or wants the USPTO to think) is patentably novel. Specifically, what they're claiming is:
A computer-readable medium having computer-executable modules for execution on a client computer in association with advertising delivery comprising:
an opt-in module, comprising support for selecting an advertising delivery mode;
a user profiling module for collecting user profile data;
and an advertising delivery module for presenting a targeted advertisement corresponding to information in the user profile data according to the selected advertising delivery mode.
This is what the USPTO will be looking at when they do their prior art search.
I hope this isn't taken as a troll. How can Linux users claim better security than Windows, then write books about how to make sure the OS really is secure?
If we could get the average Joe Bob Windows user to read a book about security, I'm sure we'd see a lot fewer Windows security breaches, too.
All of which just suggests to me that the difference is in the user base (that's a compliment), not the technology.
If they don't understand double-click how will the OS make any difference?
My point is, if users have trouble using their mouse correctly, how can we expect them to *easily* learn a completely new operating environment and application suite? I do think that most people can make the leap *given time*, but that's why I said fear isn't the real obstacle.
They aren't configuring hardware or apps anyway.
Most people won't have the benefit of someone like you to hold their hand through the process. If we're talking about converting the masses to Linux, we have to consider the average user with poor (if any) technical resources to fall back on.
Ultimately, users want to spend their time using applications, not figuring out the OS. As other posters have pointed out, Linux still lags in terms of configuration hassles relative to Windows. If we geeks find it time-consuming, the masses will find it utterly inaccessible. Until Linux can address this hurdle and get the average user into application mode quickly, it will remain a niche product.
and people who use computers learn new things all the time.
Hard to believe, given that most non-technical people (and some of the technical ones) in my building haven't even learned not to double-click URLs. When things don't work, it's attributed to gremlins, and when it does work, it's attributed to a higher diety.
I'm sorry, but the REAL obstacles (hint: fear isn't one of them) to adopting an entirely new operating system don't go away just by putting your fingers in your ears and shouting, "NAH NAH NAH, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"
I think you just described the difference between computer science and software development, not the difference between programming and non-programming.
Some people like to build a computer by simply identifying compatible components and plugging them together. Others aren't satisfied unless they know the intimate details of how each of those individual components works. Either way the computer does its job in the end.
Hopefully this analogy makes sense. Basically, don't assume that just because somebody's preferred modality is different from yours, that makes it faulty.
You are the one choosing what information to publish, and presumably, you are the only person who can remove or alter the published information. Google is simply acting as a data warehousing service in this case.
So you are relinquishing no more control than an author does by making his books available in bookstores that he doesn't own.
I believe if you start taking Tylenol 3, or codeine, you can induce constipation.... and you could stop me from reading Slashdot by gouging out my eyes, but that's not quite the same as breaking a habit, is it?
IIRC, if you're a contractor then your employer is not allowed to define the hours of when you work or don't work That may be; I don't know the legal side of it. But in practical terms, on projects that require interaction with business groups, you will be working the same hours that they do. Furthermore, some companies will require that you work on-site, as a means of providing secure access to company resources -- which will also limit your working hours.
I'm sure it's possible to build up a consulting business that avoids this kind of situations, but you may have to turn down some lucrative jobs to maintain such standards.
First thing: We need to stop calling everything a "blog". If it's one person's viewpoints, it's a blog. If it's a lot of people participating together, it's a blog. If it's a listing of updated events, it's a blog. Whatever happened to things just being a website?!
That's like saying everything's a "car", when there are sedans, coupes, minivans, SUVs, etc. The range of sites that fall under the category "blog" is a deficiency in vocabulary, but calling everything a "website" is far worse.
Second thing: You pointed out a couple of sites out of how many hundreds of millions of personal sites? For every one valuable thriving community site that stands above the crowd and represents the rare cream, I can show you half a million live journals, a hundred thousand blogger journals and a few hundred thousand personal traditional websites.
Exactly. Welcome to the topic.
Blogs remove the difficulty of entry, yet again. Imagine how much more crappy television would be (unthinkable, I know) if the barrier for entry was "you have to have a pulse and a camera" and any drivel you could think of putting together would automatically be accepted, produced and broadcast?!
No, because "accepted" doesn't apply. If there were unlimited, free channels available on cable, then we could have a similar situation. Then we could have a discussion about how to identify the stations that are worthwhile. And you know what? That would be pretty cool, and I'm sure there would be plenty of worthwhile sites created. But again, the question of filtering the content is important.
And I don't buy it when people excuse their personal blog by saying "oh, it's just for me and my family" or "it's just for me and my friends". First - if that's true, then why is it open to the public? And regardless of that, why can't you pick up the phone and talk to your friends and family? I mean, presuming they aren't in the same city you are.
Have you ever tried reading a URL over a phone? Blogs allow us to share things over the web that simply aren't that easy with other media. And some blogs do have the ability to restrict access. The fact that some people haven't elected to use those restrictions reflects ignorance or laziness more than ego -- I think you've made quite an incorrect assumption in that regard.
Nobody said every blog was shit. Just the enormous majority. Maybe five nines. And that just goes to prove the entire point both myself (and TBL) have offered. There is too much crap. And, worse, the crap is ENCOURAGED. After all, do you think Google or Live Journal cares if your blog has any real content? No. They just care that you're another account and that you'll link to some friends and you'll generate more eyeballs amongst yourselves.
Wow! Companies encourage people to use their products! I'm shocked!
Yes, there a lot of blogs. Most are not of interest to me. That's why we need intelligent searching and filtering mechanisms. That should be our focus, not complaining that people are talking about things we don't care about (after all, they will always continue to do so, through whichever means are available).
Something about "grey goo" fits in somewhere here.
Well, I'm glad some people are using their grey goo to talk about solutions rather than problems...
I do not find all blogs to be stupid, redundant, or crowdist. Although Slashdot is suffering from quite alot of groupthink, thanks to the moderation system for the most part, there is a chance for people to participate in quality discussions
Huh? First you say that Slashdot engages in groupthink, and then you say that the moderation system allows for quality discussions? It is the group itself that applies the moderation, which only enhances groupthink.
Let's draw a distinction here: there are vibrant, active communities, and there are well-balanced communities.
There's no point in worrying about the latter until we can at least identify the former...
Slashdot Mirror
Science threatens their faith.
On a related note, did you hear that the Bush administration now says that bird flu is nothing to worry about? More to the point, for bird flu to be a threat to humans, it would have to evolve, and everyone knows evolution is just a theory!
No, actually, if you bothered to read the patent you linked to, Oracle has patented:
1. A method of identifying groups within an Identity System of which a user of the Identity System is a member, the method comprising: determining a set of groups of which the user is a static member based on a group identity profile for each of one or more groups within the Identity System, wherein the group identity profile for each of the one or more groups within the Identity System defines static members of the group; determining a set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member based on the group identity profile for each of the one or more groups within the Identity System, wherein the group identity profile for each of the one or more groups within the Identity System further defines a rule for determining dynamic members of the group; combining the set of groups of which the user is a static member and the set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member; determining a set of groups of which the user is a nested member based on the combined set of groups of which the user is a static member and set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member by recursively finding one or more containing groups for the combined set of groups of which the user is a static member and set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member to a predetermined level of nesting; and reporting the set of groups of which the user is a static member, the set of groups of which the user is a dynamic member, and the set of groups of which the user is a nested member.
1. The patent relies on 44 claims, most of which can easily be shown to be prior art. (Ironically, WebCT, which was bought out by BlackBoard might be used as a counterexample of prior art).
Each claim stands or falls on its own. In other words, if a competitor is infringing just *one* of those claims, it doesn't matter whether every other claim is invalidated.
3. To violate the Patent you would have to be substantially equivalent. Essentially this means someone would have to substantially rely on Blackboard's look and feel for providing LMS services.
The infringing product only has to be substantially equivalent to what is CLAIMED. Blackboard's specific implementation is completely irrelevant to the patent, unless the details of that implementation are actually recited in the claims.
4. The patent heavily relies on the concept of "files" - like our old system, which used flat files for information management (no, we did not and could not develop for the then popular (1998-1999) Sun + Oracle combo -- too big and too expensive for us and most schools at the time). An LMS using a Relational Database may be sufficiently different enough in implementation.
How are relational databases implemented? See "substantially equivalent" above. Also, while I haven't read the claims, I suspect plenty of them are completely silent WRT to file-based implementation.
5. The patent differention seems to be at this part:
"The present invention also enhances the prior art by providing a flexible infrastructure for colleges, universities, and other institutions wishing to facilitate on-line registration and tuition payment. More specifically, the present invention can accommodate different billing methods, including, but not limited to, billing on a per-credit-hour basis, and billing on a per-registrant basis."
Again, a patent is all about what is CLAIMED. Unless this sentence is recited in the claims, it will most likely be irrelevant to any patent litigation.
That's the broadest independent claim. I think if you look at the dependent claims, you'll start seeing more points of novelty. The independent claims are usually overly agressive to begin with...
A computer-readable medium having computer-executable modules for execution on a client computer in association with advertising delivery comprising:
an opt-in module, comprising support for selecting an advertising delivery mode;
a user profiling module for collecting user profile data;
and an advertising delivery module for presenting a targeted advertisement corresponding to information in the user profile data according to the selected advertising delivery mode.
This is what the USPTO will be looking at when they do their prior art search.
I'd say it's a wee bit more than 27.71% drugs, if you think that adds up to 36%...
Wouldn't you think that only the people who were THERE have seen the moon walk in ALL its glory? ;)
I hope this isn't taken as a troll. How can Linux users claim better security than Windows, then write books about how to make sure the OS really is secure?
If we could get the average Joe Bob Windows user to read a book about security, I'm sure we'd see a lot fewer Windows security breaches, too.
All of which just suggests to me that the difference is in the user base (that's a compliment), not the technology.
There will be no moon probing while I'm around!
If they don't understand double-click how will the OS make any difference?
My point is, if users have trouble using their mouse correctly, how can we expect them to *easily* learn a completely new operating environment and application suite? I do think that most people can make the leap *given time*, but that's why I said fear isn't the real obstacle.
They aren't configuring hardware or apps anyway.
Most people won't have the benefit of someone like you to hold their hand through the process. If we're talking about converting the masses to Linux, we have to consider the average user with poor (if any) technical resources to fall back on.
Ultimately, users want to spend their time using applications, not figuring out the OS. As other posters have pointed out, Linux still lags in terms of configuration hassles relative to Windows. If we geeks find it time-consuming, the masses will find it utterly inaccessible. Until Linux can address this hurdle and get the average user into application mode quickly, it will remain a niche product.
People aren't stupid
No, but they're easily confused.
and people who use computers learn new things all the time.
Hard to believe, given that most non-technical people (and some of the technical ones) in my building haven't even learned not to double-click URLs. When things don't work, it's attributed to gremlins, and when it does work, it's attributed to a higher diety.
I'm sorry, but the REAL obstacles (hint: fear isn't one of them) to adopting an entirely new operating system don't go away just by putting your fingers in your ears and shouting, "NAH NAH NAH, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"
I think you just described the difference between computer science and software development, not the difference between programming and non-programming.
Why, in case the martians attack and take out all our strategic IDE reserves?
Some people like to build a computer by simply identifying compatible components and plugging them together. Others aren't satisfied unless they know the intimate details of how each of those individual components works. Either way the computer does its job in the end.
Hopefully this analogy makes sense. Basically, don't assume that just because somebody's preferred modality is different from yours, that makes it faulty.
"Under your control" -- in what sense?
You are the one choosing what information to publish, and presumably, you are the only person who can remove or alter the published information. Google is simply acting as a data warehousing service in this case.
So you are relinquishing no more control than an author does by making his books available in bookstores that he doesn't own.
Unless I've missed your point?
I believe if you start taking Tylenol 3, or codeine, you can induce constipation. ... and you could stop me from reading Slashdot by gouging out my eyes, but that's not quite the same as breaking a habit, is it?
Er, so #6 isn't a habit for you? Maybe you should get some more fiber in the diet;-)
;-)
Er, so #6 is a habit for you? And how would you go about breaking that habit?
I'm a full-time employee. I'm just stating what I've learned from contractors I've worked with.
IIRC, if you're a contractor then your employer is not allowed to define the hours of when you work or don't work
That may be; I don't know the legal side of it. But in practical terms, on projects that require interaction with business groups, you will be working the same hours that they do. Furthermore, some companies will require that you work on-site, as a means of providing secure access to company resources -- which will also limit your working hours.
I'm sure it's possible to build up a consulting business that avoids this kind of situations, but you may have to turn down some lucrative jobs to maintain such standards.
Contracting isn't exactly self-management. Many companies prefer to do all project management themselves and simply treat contractors as implementers.
Duct tape!
... but PETA complained about the chickens so I had to stop. Now I'm just a nerd.
Both villans are great ... Plus they're both great villians
Yes, but what I want to know is, are the villians great?
First thing: We need to stop calling everything a "blog". If it's one person's viewpoints, it's a blog. If it's a lot of people participating together, it's a blog. If it's a listing of updated events, it's a blog. Whatever happened to things just being a website?!
That's like saying everything's a "car", when there are sedans, coupes, minivans, SUVs, etc. The range of sites that fall under the category "blog" is a deficiency in vocabulary, but calling everything a "website" is far worse.
Second thing: You pointed out a couple of sites out of how many hundreds of millions of personal sites? For every one valuable thriving community site that stands above the crowd and represents the rare cream, I can show you half a million live journals, a hundred thousand blogger journals and a few hundred thousand personal traditional websites.
Exactly. Welcome to the topic.
Blogs remove the difficulty of entry, yet again. Imagine how much more crappy television would be (unthinkable, I know) if the barrier for entry was "you have to have a pulse and a camera" and any drivel you could think of putting together would automatically be accepted, produced and broadcast?!
No, because "accepted" doesn't apply. If there were unlimited, free channels available on cable, then we could have a similar situation. Then we could have a discussion about how to identify the stations that are worthwhile. And you know what? That would be pretty cool, and I'm sure there would be plenty of worthwhile sites created. But again, the question of filtering the content is important.
And I don't buy it when people excuse their personal blog by saying "oh, it's just for me and my family" or "it's just for me and my friends". First - if that's true, then why is it open to the public? And regardless of that, why can't you pick up the phone and talk to your friends and family? I mean, presuming they aren't in the same city you are.
Have you ever tried reading a URL over a phone? Blogs allow us to share things over the web that simply aren't that easy with other media. And some blogs do have the ability to restrict access. The fact that some people haven't elected to use those restrictions reflects ignorance or laziness more than ego -- I think you've made quite an incorrect assumption in that regard.
Nobody said every blog was shit. Just the enormous majority. Maybe five nines. And that just goes to prove the entire point both myself (and TBL) have offered. There is too much crap. And, worse, the crap is ENCOURAGED. After all, do you think Google or Live Journal cares if your blog has any real content? No. They just care that you're another account and that you'll link to some friends and you'll generate more eyeballs amongst yourselves.
Wow! Companies encourage people to use their products! I'm shocked!
Yes, there a lot of blogs. Most are not of interest to me. That's why we need intelligent searching and filtering mechanisms. That should be our focus, not complaining that people are talking about things we don't care about (after all, they will always continue to do so, through whichever means are available).
Something about "grey goo" fits in somewhere here.
Well, I'm glad some people are using their grey goo to talk about solutions rather than problems...
I do not find all blogs to be stupid, redundant, or crowdist. Although Slashdot is suffering from quite alot of groupthink, thanks to the moderation system for the most part, there is a chance for people to participate in quality discussions
Huh? First you say that Slashdot engages in groupthink, and then you say that the moderation system allows for quality discussions? It is the group itself that applies the moderation, which only enhances groupthink.
Let's draw a distinction here: there are vibrant, active communities, and there are well-balanced communities.
There's no point in worrying about the latter until we can at least identify the former...