This is a difficult issue, but as a practical matter some reasonable measures inside libraries and their ilk should be applied. It makes no sense to filter the content for a 30 year old. But it does make sense to filter, even imperfectly, for a 10 year old.
Anyone that does not agree with this reasonable view falls into one or more of the following categories:
1. They don't see the harm in showing to a 10 year old a latex-halter-toped crotchless-pantie deviant wearing stiletto-heels kicking a bound naked guy in the nuts.
2. They are a latex-halter-toped crotchless-pantie wearing deviant that wears stiletto-heels and kicks bound naked guys in the nuts.
3. They don't know what 60% of internet content looks like.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Just because the control mechanism of a machine has moved from a purely physical implementation to an electronic one does not diminish the truth of its mechanical nature.
Let me paraphrase this: The fact that something is not physical does not dimish its physical nature.
My paraphrase sounds absurd, but that is exactly what the original sentence is saying.
I have two topically random thoughts:
1. Math is mechanical
2. Algorithms are mechanical And it does not matter that they are mechanical.
Maybe patents are okay for things you can hold, but they are not okay for things you can think.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Your comments are right on because software is the expression of an idea.
UML, flow-charts, etc, are considered easier to read by some people, but they are just expressions of the same thing. The CASE driven software development method is proof of this. (E.g., In the higher end tools you are programming by drawing diagrams!)
It is not only a hard problem to draw the line between idea and solution in software: it is impossible. At last a first-world government is recognizing this at the expense of the entrenched business interests. I don't know how this happened, but I like it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Yes, MS Access will work as a front end to other databases provided you have an appropriate OLEDB or ODBC driver for it. However, in my experience, it is a bit of a pig. My best experences have been to use it where the end user is a bit of a tinkerer and needs to create reports and queries and customize the database in ad-hoc fashion without professional intervention.
If your users will not need to evolve the system without programmer help, or you plan to have many users on at the same time you may want to talk your boss out of MS Access altogether. Can you talk him into browser based solution using JSP... or since he is so into MS, ASP (Active Server Pages)? In either case, you can use any backend database you want.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Large relative position uncertainty like you described only applies at the sub-atomic level. An entire atom has a predictable position in space and time. Need practical proof? Who has not seen the single-atom logo etches IBM and other research departments have been showing over the last decade? Or how about the nano-machines that are just a few atoms thick reported here on/. and other places.
Don't worry, your dinner table will never re-materialize a meter from where you were about to set your macaroni.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
The legal system has evolved into a minefield for the individual. Beware everything you have signed. It could be that they already own your product.
If you are a gambler and feel this product is a very big thing, do the following:
1. Do NOT tell anyone about your project.
2. Quit your job
3. Document as best as you can HOW it is that you thought of this on your time and worked on it on YOUR time.
4. Do NOT try to sell it to ANY of the (former!) employer's clients.
If luck is on your side, one or a few of the following might happen:
1. Your employer does not notice what has happened.
2. Your employer decides it is not worth the effort to prosecute you.
3. If legal action is taken against you, you have documented the events clearly enough that there is a chance you can challenge these ridiculous IP agreements and win.
Good luck.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Reagan cut taxes in 1981 even more than Bush is planning. But he also INCREASED spending on defense. The result was an increase in science and technology demand in the USA. This spured an influx of talent into science and engineering. I think the technology boom we've experienced until recently is in part the result of critical momentum established in the 1980's.
I'm not convinced that putting money into rich folks hands alone is enough to do the same thing. They are more likely to open new fast food restaurants and such than hire engineers and scientest to design and build things they cannot sell.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Speakeasy is my provider now, Concentric was the year before. Both use COVAD. I purchased COVAD stock (bad choice) partly because I was so impressed with they professional and competent manner in which they handled both installs. The Verizon techs on the other hand (thats my local phone company) were difficult to schedule and did not seem to know much about what they were supposed to do. The few problems I experienced were directly attributable to Verizon.
I guess customer service and quality people are not enough when your business depends on the cooperative competence of your competition -- as it does in the case of DSL.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
A good alternative to the word invention is discovery. If you can agree with that, it becomes more difficult to justify corporate ownership of any idea.
I refused to sign my previous employer's IP agreement without significant revision. They adjusted the document. If I could survive without eating or paying for a place to live, I would have walked away. I'm ashamed that my small signature on an adjusted agreement adds a little more inertia to the falsehood that these things are legitimate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
The physics of language implosion 1000 years ago are very different from the realities of today. Whereas each town and city was almost "Galapagos Island" like in it practical isolation of things like language, this is not true for most of the world today. Today it is much less likely that a language, such as English, will evolve undisturbed and uninfluenced in any part of the world to the point where it is no longer understandable.
What is different between today's reality and Latin's reality 1000 years ago? Instant communications and easy travel. We stumble into dialectic changes as we travel, hear about them through friends and business associates, we are exposed to all the varieties. Not as individuals, but as societies.
I don't think English will suffer the same fate as Latin. No more than Latin would have suffered its own fate if all the speakers had lived in the same small town.
It's sad, and it shouldn't be, but they have to have press releases to maintain their "market share"
It does not seem very sad to me. Keeping up the public interest in the work seems like a very reasonable thing. Keeping up the interest of the folks paying for the work is what happens around the world to anybody doing anything. The only persons exempted from this reality are the independantly wealthy doing something as a hobby.
Billions of taxpayer dollars do not fall into the "just leave me alone while I just do stuff" category.
Kudos to NASA for keeping on top of the marketing game. What would be sad is if they lost the savy realization that this is what they must do to keep funding on track.
I don't really know how to write "old english", but then there really is no right way to write it. Before the 19th century there was no single dictionary and the literate English speakers were free to spell words any way they wanted.
Has this been a bad thing for English?
To me, the question does not even matter. Que sera sera.
AMAZON
One-Click Shopping was probably NOT already in common use. So what justification does a proponent of software patents have against Amazon getting this one? Obvious is a very slippery concept.
WINDOWING SYSTEMS
Okay, say Xerox Parc enforced patents on its windowing systems. Instead of being a good thing, consider that instead it may have stifled the eventual convergence of windowing concepts that we take for granted now. (e.g., Imagine Ford claiming patent rights on putting a steering wheel on the left and the gas pedal on the floor. Do you want all the other carmakers to think "laterally" and innovate their own man/car interfaces?)
It is tough to justify intellectual monopoly rights when the details are considered.
It is amazing how much insight you derive into my intellectual capacities (or in this case, lack there-of) from a few quickly typed sentences. Kudus to you and your powerfully analytical mind. (Please write a book about your techniques some day.)
Can your powerful mind tell me how it is we have fire, the wheel, algebra, cloth, farming, shoes, and whatever else god did not directly grow out of the ground, without the administrative burden of intellectual monopoly litigation? Could it be that perhaps people did invent before Ben Franklin proposed patents?
As written in the article,
"The missing machine [was sent to the office of the BBC Newsnight presenter] last month. However, the rotors had been removed" part of the equipment was recovered last month.
It was only yesterday that anyone was apprehended.
...on team projects. It is hard to meet face to face on an ad-hoc basis that way.
For people that work alone to a deadline, it should be fine. But how many people really work independently?
Is there any truth to the assertion I heard on a talk show recently that the US federal vote count(president) is performed without public oversight by a for-profit company? It sounds crazy, but I don't know how to verify if it is true or not.
1. War on drugs.
If we must fight a war, and my advisors suggest it, I will support putting our soldiers on drugs if it helps them fight more effectively.
2. Minority Religions
I think minorities in religion is a good thing.
3. Why give a tax cut?
The average taxpayer can do better things with the $300/per year they will save than the folks in Washington can do with the billions it will cost in revenue. Think about it, every middle class American taxpayer will have the equivalent of $25 for each month. That's alot of Americans!
4. Electoral Reform
The people should decide.
5. Intellectual Property
no comment (confused look)
6. Encryption
We are a strong country and a proud people. (followed by a confused look)
7. Rising Political Protests
That's Clinton's fault!
8. Asteroid Defenses
I'll bring Democrats and Republicans together to fight them if needed. We have rockets and stuff.
9. The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
Character is the most important ingredient that our country needs right now. And I'm quite a character. Some folks even call me a clown.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a difficult issue, but as a practical matter some reasonable measures inside libraries and their ilk should be applied. It makes no sense to filter the content for a 30 year old. But it does make sense to filter, even imperfectly, for a 10 year old.
Anyone that does not agree with this reasonable view falls into one or more of the following categories:
1. They don't see the harm in showing to a 10 year old a latex-halter-toped crotchless-pantie deviant wearing stiletto-heels kicking a bound naked guy in the nuts.
2. They are a latex-halter-toped crotchless-pantie wearing deviant that wears stiletto-heels and kicks bound naked guys in the nuts.
3. They don't know what 60% of internet content looks like.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Just because the control mechanism of a machine has moved from a purely physical implementation to an electronic one does not diminish the truth of its mechanical nature.
Let me paraphrase this: The fact that something is not physical does not dimish its physical nature.
My paraphrase sounds absurd, but that is exactly what the original sentence is saying.
I have two topically random thoughts:
1. Math is mechanical
2. Algorithms are mechanical
And it does not matter that they are mechanical.
Maybe patents are okay for things you can hold, but they are not okay for things you can think.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Your comments are right on because software is the expression of an idea.
UML, flow-charts, etc, are considered easier to read by some people, but they are just expressions of the same thing. The CASE driven software development method is proof of this. (E.g., In the higher end tools you are programming by drawing diagrams!)
It is not only a hard problem to draw the line between idea and solution in software: it is impossible. At last a first-world government is recognizing this at the expense of the entrenched business interests. I don't know how this happened, but I like it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
If Yahoo is feeling the banner pinch, how is slashdot.org dealing with this reality? Has the banner dynamic changed here yet?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Yes, MS Access will work as a front end to other databases provided you have an appropriate OLEDB or ODBC driver for it. However, in my experience, it is a bit of a pig. My best experences have been to use it where the end user is a bit of a tinkerer and needs to create reports and queries and customize the database in ad-hoc fashion without professional intervention.
... or since he is so into MS, ASP (Active Server Pages)? In either case, you can use any backend database you want.
If your users will not need to evolve the system without programmer help, or you plan to have many users on at the same time you may want to talk your boss out of MS Access altogether. Can you talk him into browser based solution using JSP
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
A one atom transister would imply that the atom IS a transister. I think not.
What the article says is that the transisters are 3 atoms thick and 30nm wide.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Your physics seems rustier than mine.
/. and other places.
Large relative position uncertainty like you described only applies at the sub-atomic level. An entire atom has a predictable position in space and time. Need practical proof? Who has not seen the single-atom logo etches IBM and other research departments have been showing over the last decade? Or how about the nano-machines that are just a few atoms thick reported here on
Don't worry, your dinner table will never re-materialize a meter from where you were about to set your macaroni.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Good point about CDR. The media may change, but the reality will not. If people can copy, they will copy. How can anyone really expect to stop it all?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
The legal system has evolved into a minefield for the individual. Beware everything you have signed. It could be that they already own your product.
If you are a gambler and feel this product is a very big thing, do the following:
1. Do NOT tell anyone about your project.
2. Quit your job
3. Document as best as you can HOW it is that you thought of this on your time and worked on it on YOUR time.
4. Do NOT try to sell it to ANY of the (former!) employer's clients.
If luck is on your side, one or a few of the following might happen:
1. Your employer does not notice what has happened.
2. Your employer decides it is not worth the effort to prosecute you.
3. If legal action is taken against you, you have documented the events clearly enough that there is a chance you can challenge these ridiculous IP agreements and win.
Good luck.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Reagan cut taxes in 1981 even more than Bush is planning. But he also INCREASED spending on defense. The result was an increase in science and technology demand in the USA. This spured an influx of talent into science and engineering. I think the technology boom we've experienced until recently is in part the result of critical momentum established in the 1980's.
I'm not convinced that putting money into rich folks hands alone is enough to do the same thing. They are more likely to open new fast food restaurants and such than hire engineers and scientest to design and build things they cannot sell.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Speakeasy is my provider now, Concentric was the year before. Both use COVAD. I purchased COVAD stock (bad choice) partly because I was so impressed with they professional and competent manner in which they handled both installs. The Verizon techs on the other hand (thats my local phone company) were difficult to schedule and did not seem to know much about what they were supposed to do. The few problems I experienced were directly attributable to Verizon.
I guess customer service and quality people are not enough when your business depends on the cooperative competence of your competition -- as it does in the case of DSL.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
There goes the rest of my portfolio. So much for getting rich from the bandwidth boom. :(
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
A good alternative to the word invention is discovery. If you can agree with that, it becomes more difficult to justify corporate ownership of any idea.
I refused to sign my previous employer's IP agreement without significant revision. They adjusted the document. If I could survive without eating or paying for a place to live, I would have walked away. I'm ashamed that my small signature on an adjusted agreement adds a little more inertia to the falsehood that these things are legitimate.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
Seems reasonable to pay for a book once because that is the only feasible way to structure things.
Otherwise what are we to consider? Burn books when you are done with them or face legal entanglements?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
The physics of language implosion 1000 years ago are very different from the realities of today. Whereas each town and city was almost "Galapagos Island" like in it practical isolation of things like language, this is not true for most of the world today. Today it is much less likely that a language, such as English, will evolve undisturbed and uninfluenced in any part of the world to the point where it is no longer understandable.
What is different between today's reality and Latin's reality 1000 years ago? Instant communications and easy travel. We stumble into dialectic changes as we travel, hear about them through friends and business associates, we are exposed to all the varieties. Not as individuals, but as societies.
I don't think English will suffer the same fate as Latin. No more than Latin would have suffered its own fate if all the speakers had lived in the same small town.
It's sad, and it shouldn't be, but they have to have press releases to maintain their "market share"
It does not seem very sad to me. Keeping up the public interest in the work seems like a very reasonable thing. Keeping up the interest of the folks paying for the work is what happens around the world to anybody doing anything. The only persons exempted from this reality are the independantly wealthy doing something as a hobby.
Billions of taxpayer dollars do not fall into the "just leave me alone while I just do stuff" category.
Kudos to NASA for keeping on top of the marketing game. What would be sad is if they lost the savy realization that this is what they must do to keep funding on track.
I don't really know how to write "old english", but then there really is no right way to write it. Before the 19th century there was no single dictionary and the literate English speakers were free to spell words any way they wanted.
Has this been a bad thing for English?
To me, the question does not even matter. Que sera sera.
AMAZON
One-Click Shopping was probably NOT already in common use. So what justification does a proponent of software patents have against Amazon getting this one? Obvious is a very slippery concept.
WINDOWING SYSTEMS
Okay, say Xerox Parc enforced patents on its windowing systems. Instead of being a good thing, consider that instead it may have stifled the eventual convergence of windowing concepts that we take for granted now. (e.g., Imagine Ford claiming patent rights on putting a steering wheel on the left and the gas pedal on the floor. Do you want all the other carmakers to think "laterally" and innovate their own man/car interfaces?)
It is tough to justify intellectual monopoly rights when the details are considered.
It is amazing how much insight you derive into my intellectual capacities (or in this case, lack there-of) from a few quickly typed sentences. Kudus to you and your powerfully analytical mind. (Please write a book about your techniques some day.)
Can your powerful mind tell me how it is we have fire, the wheel, algebra, cloth, farming, shoes, and whatever else god did not directly grow out of the ground, without the administrative burden of intellectual monopoly litigation? Could it be that perhaps people did invent before Ben Franklin proposed patents?
As written in the article, "The missing machine [was sent to the office of the BBC Newsnight presenter] last month. However, the rotors had been removed" part of the equipment was recovered last month.
It was only yesterday that anyone was apprehended.
How many reasons do you need to realize that the patents are wrong right down to the concept.
This is just another outragous result of the flawed thinking that intellectual monopolies are okay.
...on team projects. It is hard to meet face to face on an ad-hoc basis that way.
For people that work alone to a deadline, it should be fine. But how many people really work independently?
Is there any truth to the assertion I heard on a talk show recently that the US federal vote count(president) is performed without public oversight by a for-profit company? It sounds crazy, but I don't know how to verify if it is true or not.
Give it away and I'll take one. At that point it is worth the price!
Why would I want to step down to television resolution on my 1024 x 768 computer display to play these games?
1. War on drugs. If we must fight a war, and my advisors suggest it, I will support putting our soldiers on drugs if it helps them fight more effectively. 2. Minority Religions I think minorities in religion is a good thing. 3. Why give a tax cut? The average taxpayer can do better things with the $300/per year they will save than the folks in Washington can do with the billions it will cost in revenue. Think about it, every middle class American taxpayer will have the equivalent of $25 for each month. That's alot of Americans! 4. Electoral Reform The people should decide. 5. Intellectual Property no comment (confused look) 6. Encryption We are a strong country and a proud people. (followed by a confused look) 7. Rising Political Protests That's Clinton's fault! 8. Asteroid Defenses I'll bring Democrats and Republicans together to fight them if needed. We have rockets and stuff. 9. The Future of the Country, and of Humanity Character is the most important ingredient that our country needs right now. And I'm quite a character. Some folks even call me a clown.