Even if only 1 bad patent is prevented from passage and/or enforcement it will be an improvement.
Who exactly is going to go reading patents and reviewing them for the patent office?
Mike over at Tech Dirt of course.
Lawyers? No... they'd be much more interested in spending their time on similar work that they actually get paid for.
sure
Developers/scientists/engineers? No... (AFAIK, IANAL) most legal advice suggests that you shouldn't go reading about patents in your field, and instead just read patents whenever they become relevant to you. (when you're being sued for infringement, for example)
Most "consumerism" advice is never read anything, just bumble along in your daily life until you die. Some people read encyclopedia's for fun, some people read the law for fun, some people actually like to read patents. There certainly aren't millions of these people, but they are out there.
Contributing in this way will not make the system any less broken. It will more likely just make it a bit easier to keep running it.
Nobody said this was a silver bullet and you just pointed out a possible improvement in one matter as it were.
You kid, but in reality this is just shifting the strain.
Try this sometime: read a book out loud so that someone (i.e. a computer) can hear and understand you (clear annuniciation, no mumbling) for 8 hours. You can take two, 30-minute breaks anytime during the 8 hours. Now repeat this for 5 days.
Why exactly is a fully featured package manager crap? I suppose you don't like dpkg either? What do you use to manage your installed software that is not crap?
Do you really think that isn't misleading? That it doesn't make the average person think that there are 100 million users?
Do you really believe that average persons actually read press releases, much less know anything about FireFox or download statistics?
The people that consume these press releases know exactly what the FireFox boys are up to. The notion that they are somehow misleading people is a fallacy.
Poor MS bigots, can't take a little of your own medicine eh?
New chips always have bugs and problems. So getting a laptop with a new Intel architecture is going to be a bit of a gamble.
I think that "New" is a bit of a misnomer. Processor design today is largely a lego-like operation. Engineers and Designers have a plethora of VLSI libraries that have been proven and can be re-used in "new" "constructions". Also, the dual-core feature is achieved largely through manufacturing and chipset advances, not "new chips" per say. Combine with that the fact that SMP has been fairly standard in both Win32 and Linux for more than a few years now and I believe a dual-core Centrino sounds like a pretty safe bet...and a helluva fast laptop[1].
... and I'm not an Intel bigot, I'd just as soon see AMD compete with the Centrino. Can I get a dual-core Opeteron for my Dell laptop - please, pretty please?
[1]This of course presumes your OEM (Compaq, Sony, Dell) chooses a decent chipset and didn't screw-up the many other items likely to ruin an excellent concept.
Don't cry bloody murder every time something happens that you don't 100% approve of (and that goes for the grandparent just as much as you)
Sorry, I learn by immitating, and when all of my "leaders" in society exhibit this behavior I'm inclined to do just the same.
Dear Google, the tides they are a changing. Hang on tight.
Remember kids: libertarians want a minimal state whose sole function is to protect them from the wrath of their slaves.
You realize you discredit yourself with such openly hostile blanket statements (troll). Most libertarians want as much social AND economic freedom as they can get. Most of the rest of the country doesn't realize that Liberty and Security are polar opposites. But hey, if you want a nanny state just keep up the status quo.
Remember Children: blanket statements, baseless accusations and false representation are great ways to get people to write you off as a child.
My company produces a client/server product that communicates via our custom message based protocol over a persistent TCP/IP socket. Because our product is designed to work from any computer, we have to consider that there is potentially many firewalls that we simply could never hope to have opened up for our service.
For that reason, the application server runs on ports 80 and 443. The traffic between the client and the server is very much *not* HTTP, or HTTPS, so we do run into problems with firewalls that can inspect and identify HTTP packets, but aside from those rare instances, this is an elegant solution to the firewall problem.
Is there something inherently wrong or evil with this solution?
Slashdot Mirror
It's suppose to be funny, but it's true.
What makes you think this will improve matters?
Even if only 1 bad patent is prevented from passage and/or enforcement it will be an improvement.
Who exactly is going to go reading patents and reviewing them for the patent office?
Mike over at Tech Dirt of course.
Lawyers? No... they'd be much more interested in spending their time on similar work that they actually get paid for.
sure
Developers/scientists/engineers? No... (AFAIK, IANAL) most legal advice suggests that you shouldn't go reading about patents in your field, and instead just read patents whenever they become relevant to you. (when you're being sued for infringement, for example)
Most "consumerism" advice is never read anything, just bumble along in your daily life until you die. Some people read encyclopedia's for fun, some people read the law for fun, some people actually like to read patents. There certainly aren't millions of these people, but they are out there.
Contributing in this way will not make the system any less broken. It will more likely just make it a bit easier to keep running it.
Nobody said this was a silver bullet and you just pointed out a possible improvement in one matter as it were.
The encrypted audio would be horribly destroyed by the software DSP and you wouldn't hear anything understandable, at all.
You kid, but in reality this is just shifting the strain.
Try this sometime: read a book out loud so that someone (i.e. a computer) can hear and understand you (clear annuniciation, no mumbling) for 8 hours. You can take two, 30-minute breaks anytime during the 8 hours. Now repeat this for 5 days.
Why exactly is a fully featured package manager crap? I suppose you don't like dpkg either? What do you use to manage your installed software that is not crap?
Do you really think that isn't misleading? That it doesn't make the average person think that there are 100 million users?
Do you really believe that average persons actually read press releases, much less know anything about FireFox or download statistics?
The people that consume these press releases know exactly what the FireFox boys are up to. The notion that they are somehow misleading people is a fallacy.
Poor MS bigots, can't take a little of your own medicine eh?
New chips always have bugs and problems. So getting a laptop with a new Intel architecture is going to be a bit of a gamble.
... and I'm not an Intel bigot, I'd just as soon see AMD compete with the Centrino. Can I get a dual-core Opeteron for my Dell laptop - please, pretty please?
I think that "New" is a bit of a misnomer. Processor design today is largely a lego-like operation. Engineers and Designers have a plethora of VLSI libraries that have been proven and can be re-used in "new" "constructions". Also, the dual-core feature is achieved largely through manufacturing and chipset advances, not "new chips" per say. Combine with that the fact that SMP has been fairly standard in both Win32 and Linux for more than a few years now and I believe a dual-core Centrino sounds like a pretty safe bet...and a helluva fast laptop[1].
[1]This of course presumes your OEM (Compaq, Sony, Dell) chooses a decent chipset and didn't screw-up the many other items likely to ruin an excellent concept.
Don't cry bloody murder every time something happens that you don't 100% approve of (and that goes for the grandparent just as much as you)
Sorry, I learn by immitating, and when all of my "leaders" in society exhibit this behavior I'm inclined to do just the same. Dear Google, the tides they are a changing. Hang on tight.
Everybody knows the ladies prefer the guys with the cache, regardless of their size and speed.
Remember kids: libertarians want a minimal state whose sole function is to protect them from the wrath of their slaves.
You realize you discredit yourself with such openly hostile blanket statements (troll). Most libertarians want as much social AND economic freedom as they can get. Most of the rest of the country doesn't realize that Liberty and Security are polar opposites. But hey, if you want a nanny state just keep up the status quo.
Remember Children: blanket statements, baseless accusations and false representation are great ways to get people to write you off as a child.
You had it easy.
255 of us, livin' in a vacuum tube under a mountain of punch-chards, and when our dad got home he would thrash us to sleep with a broken floppy.
My company produces a client/server product that communicates via our custom message based protocol over a persistent TCP/IP socket. Because our product is designed to work from any computer, we have to consider that there is potentially many firewalls that we simply could never hope to have opened up for our service.
For that reason, the application server runs on ports 80 and 443. The traffic between the client and the server is very much *not* HTTP, or HTTPS, so we do run into problems with firewalls that can inspect and identify HTTP packets, but aside from those rare instances, this is an elegant solution to the firewall problem.
Is there something inherently wrong or evil with this solution?