I found it a bit odd that the report says they were discovered in an isolated area of the Blue Mountains in New South Wales, yet they are being developed commercially as a joint venture with a Queensland Gov Department. The QLD border is ~1000km away. Long way to travel.
I remember going to a macadamia nut farm in Hawaii once. They had a prize of a lifetime supply of macadamias if you could get a nut out of a shell without using a saw. I tried smashing it with a rock with no luck. Apparently, no one had ever collected the prize.
My primary school (in Brisbane, QLD) had Macadamia tree in the grounds so I got a lot of practice...
The shells are damned tough. You DON'T want to use a saw (too much work!). It's difficult to use a (lump/sledge) hammer because you can't hit it hard enough to break the shell and NOT pulverise the kernel. For a while I used a really big vice on my Dad's work bench. That way you could apply a huge force that would only operate over a very short distance.
Many of the commercial home nut crackers use a hammer and an anvil with a hole that the nut sits inside with only a small part protruding. That way the hammer cracks the shell and then is decelerated before destroying the kernel.
How could some people be smart enough to crack GSM and not smart enough together a PDF that does not look like ass?
I don't know shit about dot products but I do know a shitty looking PDF when I see one.
Somebody give these folks some fonts!
As it prints out fairly well (even on an ancient laser printer), couldn't you equally say it's a failing of the pdf viewer software in that it can't adequately render certain fonts?
Yes they should, and for a similar reason. Applying for a patent is asking the Government to grant you an exclusive monopoly on an idea for as long as 19 years. Anyone wanting to use that idea MUST be able to contact you to work out a deal so you have to be willing to release your contact information for that purpose. I'd say failure to maintain current information should be grounds for voiding a patent.
On the contrary. The inventors' addresses do not have to be included all the time because, in most cases, the invention has been assigned to a company, usually the inventors' employer. Anyone who wishes the use the patent should therefore use the assignee as the contact point.
Furthermore, inventors sometimes move house and therefore probably won't be contactable after a few years, whereas companies generally maintain a bigger profile.
They're attracted by CO2, which you don't have much of a choice except to exhale. A naturalist (in Kakadu National Park, Australia, which has 'one or two' mozzies) told me they are also are attracted to oestrogen, which we all produce. Note, however, that I believe that alcohol makes male bodies produce more... but at least I guess you don't feel the initial bites.:-)
Mosquitos find their targets from the trail of carbon dioxide left behind by exhaling. So I have heavy doubts about this Korean invention working at all. What does work so far are those traps with their own CO2 generators. (But even then it is not perfect.)
Those high frequency sound generators may repel mice and rats,
I seem to remember reading the blurb that went with a DIY electronic mozzie repeller project, that said that the idea behind it was that the device mimicked the the frequency of the male mosquito. Since it's the pregnant female that bites, it was supposed to work because she would not want any more male company....
IIRC, I later read another article that said these devices didn't work becaue the sound of the male just made the females more angry/aggressive which was counterproductive:-)
To add to the previous replier, those work by heating up the tiny amount of residual gas that's in the near vacuum. The increased pressure due to the heating on the dark side of the paddles does the pushing.
Well, I have taken (some of) your advice. I have written a letter to most of the EU representatives from the UK. I enclose the text so that other slashdotters can use it in contacting any EU reps. I may not be the best rhetorician, and I certainly glossed over many technical details, but feel free to use/modify the following:
I am writing this because the European Union is considering a alteration of patent law to bring it in line with U.S. patent law particularly with respect to software patents.
IANAPL, but I have written and co-written several patents that have been filed in EU and US.
What makes people think that "software" patents don't already exist and are not accepted at the EPO? Many that I have read include "a method of..."-style claims which, for all intents and purposes, cover software.
Besides, how can you tell the difference between a black-box device which is using a "dedicated hardware" solution and one that is using a CPU? To further confuse the issue, if that CPU's program is stored in ROM, is it not "dedicated hardware"?
Anyway, from what I've read, my understanding is that the invention (however implemented) must still be novel and contribute to the advancement of science/technology. Of course, I have found in practice that the EPO is a lot more stringent in its patent examinations in this regard than the USPTO.:-)
Some posters criticized the book as children's fare, yet I noticed the top 1 and 2 books on Amazon.co.uk were the (1) Childrens version (pretty cover, illustrations, maybe bigger print?) and (2) the Adult version (drab cover art, no illustrations, smaller print (766 pages))
Unless they are cunningly subliminal, there are no illustrations in the "children's" version which is the one we purchased. (At the time, it was the only one at the local supermarket). I later quickly compared the sizes of the two and it looked to me that they were about the same. I'd imagine the costs of doing two completely different print runs would be a bit high - this way they only need to change the binding.
I regularly get spam addressed to my address along with other users at the same domain. But I doubt my university sells addresses. It's probably just what some spam software does, since spam assassin can be set up to assign a higher score to messages where your address isn't in the To or Cc fields.
I get this too with a batch of email addresses with my colleagues names.
The spammers probably just sort their database so that, when they merge in newly harvested addresses, they can remove duplicates more easily.
This practice, called "submarine patenting" was, in part, the reason. By the way, the inventor of thios patent, Jerry Lemelson, was famous for doing this (he is now dead) Clearly he was not able to exploit any loopholes in God's technology system then...
One thing I have to wonder, if it was such a great idea for a patent, why did it take so long to get a patent issued? Glitch, or curruptions?
IANAPL but...
It sounds like the (old) stupid US patent laws and the "technique" known as "submarining". It allowed the patent holder to effectively delay the final publication/release of the patent until they found someone they could sting.
Thankfully, AFAIU, the US patent office has now caught up with the rest of the world and has brought their patent laws (for new patents) into line with everyone else. IIRC, patents now become 'public' after a set amount of time and they only are valid for a fixed period after the initial filing. Simon
When it was built, there were already military aircraft bigger and faster, and there have been many aircraft since better in many ways.
I seem to recall (so I may be wrong) that the amazing thing with Concorde was that it could sustain mach 2.2 whereas other aircraft often could only do that sort of speed for a very much shorter burst.
Boeing have a rather nice alternative ready for production. It's another delta-wing that looks as cool as concorde, and is rated for mach 0.95. It is almost as fast as concorde, but much cheaper to run.
I won't argue the 'cheaper' bit but, IIRC, Concorde does ~ mach 2.0. How is 0.95 almost as fast?! That's what a 747 does!
If we had 2 or 3-year patents, I think that would be much better.
Not at all. For example, I spent about 1 year (on and off) working on an invention after which I made a patent application. Once filed, it might be 2, 3, or more years before it makes it into the market. With what you're proposing, the patent would have expired long before it was useful!
Here comes corporate Google! Whatever happened to the morals of Google "don't be evil"?
There is probably nothing immoral in what they have done. You forget that a patent also protects the inventor from someone who is immoral from patenting that invention and then making the original/real inventor pay.
I hope they aren't planning on trying to enforce this patent.
If a patent is genuinely valid, why shouldn't someone protext their invention? They took the risk and spent money developing it - they don't want someone else immediately** getting the benefit of their effort for no cost.
(**Obviously after ~20years a second party can use the technique. That's the basic idea of the patent system - it publishes things which would otherwise be kept as trade secrets, thus advancing technology, in return for a limited monopoly)
And just to head off any, "But your eye can only see 24/30/60fps anyway, who needs more?" arguments:
* Film and television are watchable at such a low frame rate because film captures motion blur. Video games do not. Without motion blur, your brain needs more frames to make a smooth image. And even with motion blur, film is hardly smooth (watch a long horizontal pan some time, they can be painfully jerky depending on the speed of the pan).
One reason for the jerkiness is that, for physical/practical reasons, the camera shutter is only open for 1/2 the frame time i.e. only 1/48th of a second rather than the full 1/24th. This means that it's not capuring/integrating all the motion.
It certainly can't be because in the last county elections (in the UK), my area had the option to vote via the net. I believe the response was rather poor, however.
Slashdot Mirror
I found it a bit odd that the report says they were discovered in an isolated area of the Blue Mountains in New South Wales, yet they are being developed commercially as a joint venture with a Queensland Gov Department. The QLD border is ~1000km away. Long way to travel.
Are you running your own aluminium smelting plant at your house or something?!!
My primary school (in Brisbane, QLD) had Macadamia tree in the grounds so I got a lot of practice...
The shells are damned tough. You DON'T want to use a saw (too much work!). It's difficult to use a (lump/sledge) hammer because you can't hit it hard enough to break the shell and NOT pulverise the kernel. For a while I used a really big vice on my Dad's work bench. That way you could apply a huge force that would only operate over a very short distance.
Many of the commercial home nut crackers use a hammer and an anvil with a hole that the nut sits inside with only a small part protruding. That way the hammer cracks the shell and then is decelerated before destroying the kernel.
Simon
As it prints out fairly well (even on an ancient laser printer), couldn't you equally say it's a failing of the pdf viewer software in that it can't adequately render certain fonts?
On the contrary. The inventors' addresses do not have to be included all the time because, in most cases, the invention has been assigned to a company, usually the inventors' employer. Anyone who wishes the use the patent should therefore use the assignee as the contact point.
Furthermore, inventors sometimes move house and therefore probably won't be contactable after a few years, whereas companies generally maintain a bigger profile.
The inventors' home addresses are generally listed which, IMHO, is not something that should be broadcast to the entire world.
They're attracted by CO2, which you don't have much of a choice except to exhale. :-)
A naturalist (in Kakadu National Park, Australia, which has 'one or two' mozzies) told me they are also are attracted to oestrogen, which we all produce. Note, however, that I believe that alcohol makes male bodies produce more... but at least I guess you don't feel the initial bites.
I seem to remember reading the blurb that went with a DIY electronic mozzie repeller project, that said that the idea behind it was that the device mimicked the the frequency of the male mosquito. Since it's the pregnant female that bites, it was supposed to work because she would not want any more male company....
IIRC, I later read another article that said these devices didn't work becaue the sound of the male just made the females more angry/aggressive which was counterproductive
Simon
To add to the previous replier, those work by heating up the tiny amount of residual gas that's in the near vacuum. The increased pressure due to the heating on the dark side of the paddles does the pushing.
"Bill Gates On Linux"
Is he running as an emulation or natively coded?
IANAPL, but I have written and co-written several patents that have been filed in EU and US.
What makes people think that "software" patents don't already exist and are not accepted at the EPO? Many that I have read include "a method of..."-style claims which, for all intents and purposes, cover software.
Besides, how can you tell the difference between a black-box device which is using a "dedicated hardware" solution and one that is using a CPU? To further confuse the issue, if that CPU's program is stored in ROM, is it not "dedicated hardware"?
Anyway, from what I've read, my understanding is that the invention (however implemented) must still be novel and contribute to the advancement of science/technology. Of course, I have found in practice that the EPO is a lot more stringent in its patent examinations in this regard than the USPTO.
All IMHO of course.
S
Some posters criticized the book as children's fare, yet I noticed the top 1 and 2 books on Amazon.co.uk were the (1) Childrens version (pretty cover, illustrations, maybe bigger print?) and (2) the Adult version (drab cover art, no illustrations, smaller print (766 pages))
Unless they are cunningly subliminal, there are no illustrations in the "children's" version which is the one we purchased. (At the time, it was the only one at the local supermarket). I later quickly compared the sizes of the two and it looked to me that they were about the same. I'd imagine the costs of doing two completely different print runs would be a bit high - this way they only need to change the binding.
Annonymous Coward wrote:
'I'm boycotting all RIAA products until they stop suing everyone and bribing my congressman.'
Which only makes me wonder if quoting Elton John Lyrics counts as theft:
' and I think it's gonna be a long, long time...
I'm being a bit pedantic here, but surely those are Bernie Taupin's lyrics? (Elton John wrote the music).
I regularly get spam addressed to my address along with other users at the same domain. But I doubt my university sells addresses. It's probably just what some spam software does, since spam assassin can be set up to assign a higher score to messages where your address isn't in the To or Cc fields.
I get this too with a batch of email addresses with my colleagues names.
The spammers probably just sort their database so that, when they merge in newly harvested addresses, they can remove duplicates more easily.
This practice, called "submarine patenting" was, in part, the reason. By the way, the inventor of thios patent, Jerry Lemelson, was famous for doing this (he is now dead)
Clearly he was not able to exploit any loopholes in God's technology system then...
So the #1 patent wasn't "business model where sexual favors are exchanged for goods or favors"?
...
Well... patents generally require diagrams and this one got lost when the examiner decided to hide it in the bottom drawer
One thing I have to wonder, if it was such a great idea for a patent, why did it take so long to get a patent issued? Glitch, or curruptions?
IANAPL but...
It sounds like the (old) stupid US patent laws and the "technique" known as "submarining". It allowed the patent holder to effectively delay the final publication/release of the patent until they found someone they could sting.
Thankfully, AFAIU, the US patent office has now caught up with the rest of the world and has brought their patent laws (for new patents) into line with everyone else. IIRC, patents now become 'public' after a set amount of time and they only are valid for a fixed period after the initial filing.
Simon
Liquid nitrogen to make the ice cream, and liquid oxygen to start the barbeque :-)
You beat me to it, but at least I can post a link to that classic web page of mixing LOX with BBQs....
Arghh! Disaster! The original page has gone. This will have to do
Simon
When it was built, there were already military aircraft bigger and faster, and there have been many aircraft since better in many ways.
I seem to recall (so I may be wrong) that the amazing thing with Concorde was that it could sustain mach 2.2 whereas other aircraft often could only do that sort of speed for a very much shorter burst.
I won't argue the 'cheaper' bit but, IIRC, Concorde does ~ mach 2.0. How is 0.95 almost as fast?! That's what a 747 does!
Not at all. For example, I spent about 1 year (on and off) working on an invention after which I made a patent application. Once filed, it might be 2, 3, or more years before it makes it into the market. With what you're proposing, the patent would have expired long before it was useful!
The system has to benefit the inventor.
There is probably nothing immoral in what they have done. You forget that a patent also protects the inventor from someone who is immoral from patenting that invention and then making the original/real inventor pay.
If a patent is genuinely valid, why shouldn't someone protext their invention? They took the risk and spent money developing it - they don't want someone else immediately** getting the benefit of their effort for no cost.
(**Obviously after ~20years a second party can use the technique. That's the basic idea of the patent system - it publishes things which would otherwise be kept as trade secrets, thus advancing technology, in return for a limited monopoly)
Simon
One reason for the jerkiness is that, for physical/practical reasons, the camera shutter is only open for 1/2 the frame time i.e. only 1/48th of a second rather than the full 1/24th. This means that it's not capuring/integrating all the motion.
It certainly can't be because in the last county elections (in the UK), my area had the option to vote via the net. I believe the response was rather poor, however.