Friday I visited my U.S. Senator's office and requested that action be taken to fix our broken patent system. While many reforms are needed, I believe one quick fix could be implemented with minimal affect to the current system in practice but likely dramatic affect in actuality.
Free Patent Filings when entered into Public Domain
Essentially, most ideas are often conceived of by individuals before major corporations file. Seriously, does ANYONE believe Apple invented the idea of changing settings such as volume and tones played. Apple probably received several hundred feedback requests begging for those features. Long before Apple ever implemented the idea.
This would allow a filing, probably on par with a preliminary patent filing, which would establish a pre-existing prior art. And protect the inventor and all others from future lawsuits. Yes, the patent filer is giving up his or her rights to profit from the idea. But many times, an inventor begins work, and it goes slowly when you don't have billions of $$$ behind you. Only to see a mega corp get wind of the idea and beat the inventor to the punch and sue them for their own idea.
I believe many Americans would submit numerous ideas, essentially eliminating most of these frivolous patent suits.
Well, 95 & 98 were both fairly decent advancements. And at least one of those had to be an "odd" release. Same with 2000 and XP. Both fairly decent releases. So one of those had to be an "odd" as well.
Users experience the most radical UI change since DOS added Windows. And shockingly, 53% percent prefer the older more familiar Windows 7.
You know what this really means folk? Microsoft actually succeeded. If you can get 47% (or just shy of half) of users to prefer a new completely radical UI experience. You've done something really really right. As I'd expect 80% to prefer that which they're familiar with and have used since 1995.
Let's use our brains, and look at this data for what it really is. A measure of a decent amount of success. 50/50 on a new experience is good. Heck, probably didn't have that much higher support when XP or Vista came out. And those were incremental changes.
1) The first is a record of all prototypes and changes along the way.
2) A back up repository that keeps a copy
3) Facilitates multiple people working on the same item so that everyone receives the changes.
How to conceptualize it, express that it's like designing a brochure. You create a rough draft, it's send to your boss for review. She requests changes. So you create a revised copy with her changes. It then is sent off to the department head, and the project head. Both make annotations for the changes they'd like to see. Those are returned and then merged to incoporate all the changes. The next year you are releasing the brochure again, but it requires updates. This continues every year. But one year the department head says they want to make the brochure more like the one they did in 2008. So you're able to pull up the older design from the archive.
Changing it to a real world workflow they can understand will help them see the benefit.
As for cost...I would simply estimate the cost of having xxxx amount of gigabytes of redundant storage - at least mirrored.
I figured that....but I used simple figures that were fairly optimistic in my opinion. Just to show that the added tire cost is likely negated by the benefits in fuel economy. I didn't even get into the reduced cost of replacing blowouts due to under-inflated tires.
I agree, this is an invention and patentable. Though I am sure many have had this concept before, as is the case with many inventions. This is at least something new. And even that, is evolutionary, as all the items needed to do it, one way pressure valves, monitors, tires, etc are pre-existent.
Not sure where the softer tire comes from. I have a vehicle, first gen Prius that requires higher load rated tires. But if your air pressure is not kept up properly, the tire's load bearing ability drops.
Btw, the do you do your own oil changes? Cause if not, then you're probably having your tires filled up more often than you realize. Or, you might actually NOT be doing as good of a job monitoring pressure as you think. You may be within tolerances, but not optimized.
Ask yourself, would you pay $50/tire more, if you got 2-4mpg more in your vehicle?
$4,000 = 20,000 miles at 20mpg @$4/gallon (approx estimates)
$3,636 = 20,000 miles at 22mpg @$4/gallon
That's nearly $400 savings in 20,000 miles. So if they can do that for under $100/tire, you're about break even. Even 1mpg more would be about $200 (which would cover $50/tire). If your fleet averaged more than 20,000 miles per year. You might even end up saving $$$ in your annual budget.
Apple has filed a lawsuit against Goodyear tire saying their new auto-inflating tire violates their patents. They have "an app for that", and therefore, Goodyear's later tire is cleary a copy of one of their several millions apps. Apple is not sure which one, but they know since there is an "app for everything", Goodyear must be in violation.
They are asking $3.9 billion in damages and a halt on all sales of Goodyear tires. As they've pointed out tires are a clear infringement of their trade dress. Their buttons on their iPhones and iPads are round. And Goodyear tires are round. So that's $1 for every tire Goodyear has sold.
I think you're missing the point. This is EXACTLY what we need with gas at $4/gallon.
When your tire pressure is low, you get less MPG. So this tire, when the pressure gets low will open a valve to "reinflate" your tire to specified pressure. Ensuring proper ride, handling and better gas mileage.
It's not going to inflate constantly, rather just when the tire drops below a set level. Kind of like a thermostat. but for pressure. A barometricstat.
How can you ahve a non-infringing phone. Apple's trying to patent everything under the sun, oh gee they just patened location based settings. Seriously, an idea espoused for over a decade.
And they do so as filing nuances on older tech. For example, they sued Samsung for a grid of icons identical to Palm Pilot's interface. So if you can do that...and win. There is no way to be non-infringing. And Apple has already hinted at that with talks of additional lawsuits against other so-called "infringements"
So lets' put it bluntly, eventually such behaviors will result in a backlash for Apple. And they may be more forceful than Apple might expect.
As for the trail. Yes, a trial that was a clear "mistrial" with multiple breaches on so many levels. So, yeah, let's have a fair trial so we can finally shut the crApple fanbois up.
No, you're very wrong. We're seeing the tip of the iceberg. Apple is already seeking other patent issues it can sue and block Samsung and other rivals on. Apple will not cede until it is extracting an excessively high royalty from every Android phone.
This is a religious war for Apple...and the elements they're suing on are at such a basic level that there will be very little ability for a smart phone to exist without violating Apple's pseudo IP folio. How long until Apple sues on location based settings and alerts. Who cares if the ideas were espoused decades ago. Apple has the motiff "Have patent, will sue!"
For example, I had a project which required me to make some basic, rudimentary black & white icons. The ONLY graphic software I had was Microsoft Paint in Windows Vista. A dated and wholly incapable program.
I requisitioned ANY graphics package, even some free open source ones installed previously. And was turned down as it not being a necessity. So what should have been 10 minute job of icon creation turned into hours of needless painstaking pixel by pixel design in MS Paint.
Now there's stupidity.
***
Basically, a large environment should have a list of software package approved for installation. That list should cover a variety of utility types, (text, graphic, audio editors, etc). Including free and/or open source options that are approved for installation. It's not even that I don't have the ability to install. Just not the authorization.
I believe NULLIFICATION, would allow them to not charge Samsung even if the law allowed them to. (ie: Yes, we feel that Samsung infringed Apple's trade dress. But we do not feel that Apple should have rights to rounded corners. So we are NULLIFYING that claim. And not allowing Samsung to be charged.)
That is very different from FABRICATION, we feel this, so we're going to charge Samsung and deal them harsh penalties to teach them a lesson.
You have to realize that Samsung was repeatedly refused to allow relevant evidence or experts. It was extremely frustrating, and Samsung eventually got pissed enough to release stuff out in the public. Which stopped some of the injustice.
Most of it stemmed from an email bias. Where Samsung was accused of destroying evidence by not keeping emails. Apple wasn't keeping the emails either, and just pleaded that they don't do those sorts of things.
This case was a boondoggle.
***
Just the fact that the jurors were selected from Silicon Valley is in and of itself enough to claim extreme prejudice to this case.
Really, but if you dislike their products, and they're trying to prevent you from buying any thing else...that's when it gets personal.
So I am using the system, I am meeting with my Senator. I am objecting, and if the courses available to me fail to achieve results than I will have to consider alternative forms of protesting Apple.
Glacier ice is aging, and in typically fashion old northern ice is moving south to a nicer climate. It's like how nearly all retired New Englanders seem to move to Florida (why anyone elderly person would move to a hot muggy swamp is beyond me - perhaps it's a government plot to trick elderly folk into dying more quickly to keep the Social Security budget balanced).
But likewise, Arctic ice is now inclined to moved south to the Anarctic...
The QR code should link to specified government Treasury website. If it does not, (and you pre-scan the URL first), then you AUTOMATICALLY KNOW IT'S COUNTERFEIT.
Truthfully, the more and more I hear, the more and more #fail seems to be laid at HTML5's feet.
It's immature, and poorly conceptualized. Let me just simply say, it's bad design mojo. And truthfully, if so many Slashdotters actually LOOKED at where Flash and Flex were headed, they'd see it was going in a far far more intelligent direction than HTML5.
Consider this, what's the difference between a radio button and a checkbox? Usually, in HTML, one is a select one, and the other is a select any. But the truth is, that there should not be the distinguishment there. And often, HTML developers are forced to recreated radio button behavior with checkboxes for clients or go into elaborate styling of radio buttons. Essentially, recreating the objects. What about lists? Selectbox, multiselect box.
Is there ANY difference between a radio and selectbox, a list of checkboxes and a multiselect box?
NO!!!!
Simply have a list item, and then define whether it is multiselect. All the styling and visual presentation should be separate.
The truth is what is really being utilized is a select list, or multi select list. The display should be separate from the model (basic rudimentary MVC concepts here). Does HTML/HTML5 do this? Nope, but in fact Flex was going in this direction. Rather than add tons of new input types like the bassackward HTML5 standard did. Flex was in f
Slashdot Mirror
Friday I visited my U.S. Senator's office and requested that action be taken to fix our broken patent system. While many reforms are needed, I believe one quick fix could be implemented with minimal affect to the current system in practice but likely dramatic affect in actuality.
Free Patent Filings when entered into Public Domain
Essentially, most ideas are often conceived of by individuals before major corporations file. Seriously, does ANYONE believe Apple invented the idea of changing settings such as volume and tones played. Apple probably received several hundred feedback requests begging for those features. Long before Apple ever implemented the idea.
This would allow a filing, probably on par with a preliminary patent filing, which would establish a pre-existing prior art. And protect the inventor and all others from future lawsuits. Yes, the patent filer is giving up his or her rights to profit from the idea. But many times, an inventor begins work, and it goes slowly when you don't have billions of $$$ behind you. Only to see a mega corp get wind of the idea and beat the inventor to the punch and sue them for their own idea.
I believe many Americans would submit numerous ideas, essentially eliminating most of these frivolous patent suits.
I'd agree, I really really find myself liking Windows 7. In fact, that's why I am actually going to give Windows 8 a try. :-)
Well, 95 & 98 were both fairly decent advancements. And at least one of those had to be an "odd" release. Same with 2000 and XP. Both fairly decent releases. So one of those had to be an "odd" as well.
Users experience the most radical UI change since DOS added Windows. And shockingly, 53% percent prefer the older more familiar Windows 7.
You know what this really means folk? Microsoft actually succeeded. If you can get 47% (or just shy of half) of users to prefer a new completely radical UI experience. You've done something really really right. As I'd expect 80% to prefer that which they're familiar with and have used since 1995.
Let's use our brains, and look at this data for what it really is. A measure of a decent amount of success. 50/50 on a new experience is good. Heck, probably didn't have that much higher support when XP or Vista came out. And those were incremental changes.
In MARCH!!!!
Explain that it is three-fold:
1) The first is a record of all prototypes and changes along the way.
2) A back up repository that keeps a copy
3) Facilitates multiple people working on the same item so that everyone receives the changes.
How to conceptualize it, express that it's like designing a brochure. You create a rough draft, it's send to your boss for review. She requests changes. So you create a revised copy with her changes. It then is sent off to the department head, and the project head. Both make annotations for the changes they'd like to see. Those are returned and then merged to incoporate all the changes. The next year you are releasing the brochure again, but it requires updates. This continues every year. But one year the department head says they want to make the brochure more like the one they did in 2008. So you're able to pull up the older design from the archive.
Changing it to a real world workflow they can understand will help them see the benefit.
As for cost...I would simply estimate the cost of having xxxx amount of gigabytes of redundant storage - at least mirrored.
I figured that....but I used simple figures that were fairly optimistic in my opinion. Just to show that the added tire cost is likely negated by the benefits in fuel economy. I didn't even get into the reduced cost of replacing blowouts due to under-inflated tires.
Or that diesel is as of late over $4/gallon... :-(
Darn, back to the one finger press down bicycle tire test. And I was so enjoying the multi-touch test.
Heck, does Apple's multitouch patent cover the bedroom as well. My wife will be sorely disappointed if it does.
I agree, this is an invention and patentable. Though I am sure many have had this concept before, as is the case with many inventions. This is at least something new. And even that, is evolutionary, as all the items needed to do it, one way pressure valves, monitors, tires, etc are pre-existent.
Not sure where the softer tire comes from. I have a vehicle, first gen Prius that requires higher load rated tires. But if your air pressure is not kept up properly, the tire's load bearing ability drops.
Btw, the do you do your own oil changes? Cause if not, then you're probably having your tires filled up more often than you realize. Or, you might actually NOT be doing as good of a job monitoring pressure as you think. You may be within tolerances, but not optimized.
Ask yourself, would you pay $50/tire more, if you got 2-4mpg more in your vehicle?
$4,000 = 20,000 miles at 20mpg @$4/gallon (approx estimates)
$3,636 = 20,000 miles at 22mpg @$4/gallon
That's nearly $400 savings in 20,000 miles. So if they can do that for under $100/tire, you're about break even. Even 1mpg more would be about $200 (which would cover $50/tire). If your fleet averaged more than 20,000 miles per year. You might even end up saving $$$ in your annual budget.
Apple has filed a lawsuit against Goodyear tire saying their new auto-inflating tire violates their patents. They have "an app for that", and therefore, Goodyear's later tire is cleary a copy of one of their several millions apps. Apple is not sure which one, but they know since there is an "app for everything", Goodyear must be in violation.
They are asking $3.9 billion in damages and a halt on all sales of Goodyear tires. As they've pointed out tires are a clear infringement of their trade dress. Their buttons on their iPhones and iPads are round. And Goodyear tires are round. So that's $1 for every tire Goodyear has sold.
I think you're missing the point. This is EXACTLY what we need with gas at $4/gallon.
When your tire pressure is low, you get less MPG. So this tire, when the pressure gets low will open a valve to "reinflate" your tire to specified pressure. Ensuring proper ride, handling and better gas mileage.
It's not going to inflate constantly, rather just when the tire drops below a set level. Kind of like a thermostat. but for pressure. A barometricstat.
Oh, I wonder if Google succeeded in blocking the import of every iPhone, iPad, and Mac computer with their suit, would you be singing the same tune?
How can you ahve a non-infringing phone. Apple's trying to patent everything under the sun, oh gee they just patened location based settings. Seriously, an idea espoused for over a decade.
And they do so as filing nuances on older tech. For example, they sued Samsung for a grid of icons identical to Palm Pilot's interface. So if you can do that...and win. There is no way to be non-infringing. And Apple has already hinted at that with talks of additional lawsuits against other so-called "infringements"
So lets' put it bluntly, eventually such behaviors will result in a backlash for Apple. And they may be more forceful than Apple might expect.
As for the trail. Yes, a trial that was a clear "mistrial" with multiple breaches on so many levels. So, yeah, let's have a fair trial so we can finally shut the crApple fanbois up.
No, you're very wrong. We're seeing the tip of the iceberg. Apple is already seeking other patent issues it can sue and block Samsung and other rivals on. Apple will not cede until it is extracting an excessively high royalty from every Android phone.
This is a religious war for Apple...and the elements they're suing on are at such a basic level that there will be very little ability for a smart phone to exist without violating Apple's pseudo IP folio. How long until Apple sues on location based settings and alerts. Who cares if the ideas were espoused decades ago. Apple has the motiff "Have patent, will sue!"
For example, I had a project which required me to make some basic, rudimentary black & white icons. The ONLY graphic software I had was Microsoft Paint in Windows Vista. A dated and wholly incapable program.
I requisitioned ANY graphics package, even some free open source ones installed previously. And was turned down as it not being a necessity. So what should have been 10 minute job of icon creation turned into hours of needless painstaking pixel by pixel design in MS Paint.
Now there's stupidity.
***
Basically, a large environment should have a list of software package approved for installation. That list should cover a variety of utility types, (text, graphic, audio editors, etc). Including free and/or open source options that are approved for installation. It's not even that I don't have the ability to install. Just not the authorization.
And that's frustrating.
I believe NULLIFICATION, would allow them to not charge Samsung even if the law allowed them to. (ie: Yes, we feel that Samsung infringed Apple's trade dress. But we do not feel that Apple should have rights to rounded corners. So we are NULLIFYING that claim. And not allowing Samsung to be charged.)
That is very different from FABRICATION, we feel this, so we're going to charge Samsung and deal them harsh penalties to teach them a lesson.
You have to realize that Samsung was repeatedly refused to allow relevant evidence or experts. It was extremely frustrating, and Samsung eventually got pissed enough to release stuff out in the public. Which stopped some of the injustice.
Most of it stemmed from an email bias. Where Samsung was accused of destroying evidence by not keeping emails. Apple wasn't keeping the emails either, and just pleaded that they don't do those sorts of things.
This case was a boondoggle.
***
Just the fact that the jurors were selected from Silicon Valley is in and of itself enough to claim extreme prejudice to this case.
Really, but if you dislike their products, and they're trying to prevent you from buying any thing else...that's when it gets personal.
So I am using the system, I am meeting with my Senator. I am objecting, and if the courses available to me fail to achieve results than I will have to consider alternative forms of protesting Apple.
Glacier ice is aging, and in typically fashion old northern ice is moving south to a nicer climate. It's like how nearly all retired New Englanders seem to move to Florida (why anyone elderly person would move to a hot muggy swamp is beyond me - perhaps it's a government plot to trick elderly folk into dying more quickly to keep the Social Security budget balanced).
But likewise, Arctic ice is now inclined to moved south to the Anarctic...
HOW?
Seriously, can we just abolish patents...this would be funny if it wasn't so darn sad.
There is a very simple solution...
The QR code should link to specified government Treasury website. If it does not, (and you pre-scan the URL first), then you AUTOMATICALLY KNOW IT'S COUNTERFEIT.
Simple...
HTML5 - it's the holy grail!!!!
Truthfully, the more and more I hear, the more and more #fail seems to be laid at HTML5's feet.
It's immature, and poorly conceptualized. Let me just simply say, it's bad design mojo. And truthfully, if so many Slashdotters actually LOOKED at where Flash and Flex were headed, they'd see it was going in a far far more intelligent direction than HTML5.
Consider this, what's the difference between a radio button and a checkbox? Usually, in HTML, one is a select one, and the other is a select any. But the truth is, that there should not be the distinguishment there. And often, HTML developers are forced to recreated radio button behavior with checkboxes for clients or go into elaborate styling of radio buttons. Essentially, recreating the objects. What about lists? Selectbox, multiselect box.
Is there ANY difference between a radio and selectbox, a list of checkboxes and a multiselect box?
NO!!!!
Simply have a list item, and then define whether it is multiselect. All the styling and visual presentation should be separate.
The truth is what is really being utilized is a select list, or multi select list. The display should be separate from the model (basic rudimentary MVC concepts here). Does HTML/HTML5 do this? Nope, but in fact Flex was going in this direction. Rather than add tons of new input types like the bassackward HTML5 standard did. Flex was in f
Only if you have the guns...