Coporate McCarthy^H^H^H^H^H^HBrideism. How much damage does SCO get to do - based upon currently unfounded allegations - before they get told to shut up?
Nope. Software patents are bad. Period. EOF. I will never be convinced otherwise. I've listened to the RSA patent debacle, have heard Radia Perlman speak and say she was interested in pursuing research in certain applications of cryptography but wouldn't because that area was currently littered with a minefield of patents, and I've seen the USPTO not only botch the job with patent after patent but then have the gall to say they are doing a good job.
No. Patents are meant to advance the sciences and when it comes to business model patents and especially software patents they are not working as expected. To paraphrase Newton minus the implied snide, software stands on the shoulders of giants. Patents, by design, kill this. Where do you think networking would be today if SPF had been patented?
Sorry but I have no problems throwing this baby out with the fetid bathwater.
SCO has already made comments akin to "All your OSes belong to us." and have commented that they believe BSD has not lived up to the settlement agreement of '94. Of course, this week Joe^H^H^HDarl McCarthy^H^H^H^H^H^HBride has changed his tune and said the BSDs aren't a point of contention.
I have a very nice bridge to sell you if you believe that.
One 20 Fl oz bottle of Coke has 250 calories. I cut out ~800-1200 calories a day just by dumping soda and drinking tea. Same caffine goodness minus the calories.
Two patches rated by MS as critcal and both OS related vs an admittedly large number of patches, some very serious, but mostly non-os related.
Is this bit'o'news overblown? Probably. Will a lot of/.s generate a bunch of banner ad hits posting a lot of noise over it? Definately. But your example does not compare apples to apples.
That product was obviously developed by someone who doesn't have kids. Every experienced parent knows to include a "fudge" factor between the time a diaper is soiled and the time you change it. Otherwise the child probably isn't done and and you'll wind up doing a "twist/dodge/move the baby/grab whatever is handy to sop up the new mess" acrobatic maneuver that would make Jackie Chan proud.
But is that because he had kids or is it because he could never take the blinders of "God doesn't play dice" off?
I wonder if the loss of "genius" we're discussing isn't more related to not being able to get past that one great ephiphany than it has to do with settling down.
Correlation does not equal causation. Not to mention 3 out of 4 married geniuses managed to avoid this problem.
Eh, I kinda thought like that 10-15 years ago. All I can say is that there are compensations for the sacrifices you make. Right now my son is two and having the experience of being unconditionally loved is extremely rewarding. Taking him to the zoo and seeing him truly happy watching the sea lions swim and knowing I was able to provide that for him is rewarding. Grilling out and playing ball in the backyard is restful. I get more exercise doing silly dances and heck just doing stuff with my son than I ever did before.
Things that I used to do while growing up but had to sacrifice because I was pursuing my education and starting a career (e.g. camping, canoeing, playing chess, etc..) I get to do again. I can share my interests and be exposed to new ones as my children grow into individuals. Honestly, I just have new needs now and I feel my life is much richer and more vibrant for the experience.
What's funny is now that I'm in this position I look at your position of never wanting kids and see it as being bleak and superficial. It's very strange to look at myself and see this 180 turn in my attitude. And in kind I apologize to you. I don't know you and not everyone is suited to having kids. You should be able to do what you want - especially in this concern. But for me, having children is anything but bleak or sad.
It is very true that kids are hard work but, as with everything regarding intelligence and creativity, I question if there was really a drop.
Before I was married with kids I did a few things that required creativity. Writing, bouts of hacking, etc.. Nothing genius level imo but creative none the less. When my responsibilities changed the amount of time I could devote to those activities diminished but my new activities still required me to be creative. Coming up with songs off the top of my head to entertain my son or this story:
Work sent me to one of those week long Cisco courses and we spent a day doing sub/supernetting. I came home and per usual spent time with my infant son. So here I am sining the Inchworm song to him. "2 and 2 are 4. 4 and 4 are 8." then I'm looking at my son's toes and seeing that they make perfect binary digits. So now I'm singing the song and counting binary on his toes. Geeky, relevent to my field, probably will never be part of any contribution I make, but still creative imnsho.
I disagree with Dr. Kanazawa's choice of metric and especially his conclusions.
What is your take on the RSA patent issue from a European standpoint? In the EU, do you think that there was more competition in using that algorithm and are there concrete examples where the EU benefited from that piece of technology being unencumbered?
I had a chance to hear some of the American side of the story from Radia Perlman and from what little I've read it seems the RSA patent here in the US hindered adopting standards which used it - something that didn't happen in Europe. Wouldn't this real world situation make for a good argument against software patents?
You're right it is in the FAQ. I've read it and, imho, I don't think the opposition will take the same stance that the FAQ does - especially when it comes to interpretation to the Berne Convention.
Corps have a 95 year term and iirc for individuals it's something like life+50 or 75 years. That's shaving nearly half the total term off a copyrighted work.
imho, it was nice to see this introduced and I'll write my congresscritters saying I support it (though personally I'm lukewarm to the idea) but honestly I think this is dead in the water. The obvious complaint is that a copyright owner shouldn't have to keep track of their IP at the risk of losing it. Two, 50 years from when? Creation? Publication? Technically, when I create a work it automatically is copyrighted but what if I publish some of the poems I wrote in high school 20 years ago? Do I pay my $1 in 2053 or 2033? What if I pay in 2053 and someone says I should have paid in 2033? Now I have to go to court to retain my copyright? Three, it's going to get the flack that it makes us different from international/europoean standards.
Personally, I'd just rather see a bill introduced that flat out asks for a term with a finite length of time - say 28 years - retroactive and be done with it. Would have the same chance of passing as this proposal and make more of a statement.
RTFA. The problem is the application process was kept in limbo until such a time that the method was no longer novel. This was done by the people filing the patent - not the patent office.
I'm more than willing to concede that the patents should have been issued. I'm not willing to concede that they should be valid at this point in time.
There's the letter of the law and spirit of the law. This may be legal but it is an obvious abuse. The only just outcome is to have the patents invalidated to set a precident insuring this will not happen again.
Based on the current European model where the invention must advance the state-of-the-art (i.e. no more laser pointers as cat exercise tools) and no business model patents. And as previously been mentioned, you get 20 years from date of submission so bullshit like this doesn't happen.
Furthermore, no quotas on number of patent issued. Find another metric to judge an examiner's performance.
Linus doesn't own the copyright to all of the code in the kernel. To fork the entire source, all authors would have to agree to relicense their respective code.
PETA should be rejoicing! Less injured birds mean more that get to my plate. This is a triumph for humanity here.
Oh wait, you meant that PETA. Nevermind....
Re:you *can* read the salon story freely...
on
SCO SCO SCO!
·
· Score: 1
Very cool tip and if you do it in Mozilla the commercial doesn't even load but you get the cookie anyway.
Thanks!
Re:So let me get this straight...
on
SCO SCO SCO!
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
And of course, your days of linux kernel hacking are gone forever. Think about it. Whoever does this would have to examine parts of SCO's codebase to ascertain whether the claims are valid. Any contributions they make afterwards would have a Sword of Damocles over it. There would always be the risk that SCO could turn around and claim the code somehow violated the NDA.
Slashdot Mirror
Coporate McCarthy^H^H^H^H^H^HBrideism. How much damage does SCO get to do - based upon currently unfounded allegations - before they get told to shut up?
"I'm munkeyspanker21!"
"NO! I'm munkeyspanker21!"
"I'm munkeyspanker21!"
No. Patents are meant to advance the sciences and when it comes to business model patents and especially software patents they are not working as expected. To paraphrase Newton minus the implied snide, software stands on the shoulders of giants. Patents, by design, kill this. Where do you think networking would be today if SPF had been patented?
Sorry but I have no problems throwing this baby out with the fetid bathwater.
SCO has already made comments akin to "All your OSes belong to us." and have commented that they believe BSD has not lived up to the settlement agreement of '94. Of course, this week Joe^H^H^HDarl McCarthy^H^H^H^H^H^HBride has changed his tune and said the BSDs aren't a point of contention.
I have a very nice bridge to sell you if you believe that.
If this suit got MS into buying some patent reform I am completely behind their efforts. If it doesn't then let them hang.
Step 1.5.1 Stuff dounuts with laxatives before distributing them.
Of course afterwards you're probably going to want to use a different bathroom afterwards...
One 20 Fl oz bottle of Coke has 250 calories. I cut out ~800-1200 calories a day just by dumping soda and drinking tea. Same caffine goodness minus the calories.
Is this bit'o'news overblown? Probably. Will a lot of /.s generate a bunch of banner ad hits posting a lot of noise over it? Definately. But your example does not compare apples to apples.
If there was ever a faulty analogy....
My lady gives me hummers all the time. I don't know how she couldn't be less important.
That product was obviously developed by someone who doesn't have kids. Every experienced parent knows to include a "fudge" factor between the time a diaper is soiled and the time you change it. Otherwise the child probably isn't done and and you'll wind up doing a "twist/dodge/move the baby/grab whatever is handy to sop up the new mess" acrobatic maneuver that would make Jackie Chan proud.
I wonder if the loss of "genius" we're discussing isn't more related to not being able to get past that one great ephiphany than it has to do with settling down.
Correlation does not equal causation. Not to mention 3 out of 4 married geniuses managed to avoid this problem.
Things that I used to do while growing up but had to sacrifice because I was pursuing my education and starting a career (e.g. camping, canoeing, playing chess, etc..) I get to do again. I can share my interests and be exposed to new ones as my children grow into individuals. Honestly, I just have new needs now and I feel my life is much richer and more vibrant for the experience.
What's funny is now that I'm in this position I look at your position of never wanting kids and see it as being bleak and superficial. It's very strange to look at myself and see this 180 turn in my attitude. And in kind I apologize to you. I don't know you and not everyone is suited to having kids. You should be able to do what you want - especially in this concern. But for me, having children is anything but bleak or sad.
You need to get a little creative with your geometry lessons there friend.
Before I was married with kids I did a few things that required creativity. Writing, bouts of hacking, etc.. Nothing genius level imo but creative none the less. When my responsibilities changed the amount of time I could devote to those activities diminished but my new activities still required me to be creative. Coming up with songs off the top of my head to entertain my son or this story:
Work sent me to one of those week long Cisco courses and we spent a day doing sub/supernetting. I came home and per usual spent time with my infant son. So here I am sining the Inchworm song to him. "2 and 2 are 4. 4 and 4 are 8." then I'm looking at my son's toes and seeing that they make perfect binary digits. So now I'm singing the song and counting binary on his toes. Geeky, relevent to my field, probably will never be part of any contribution I make, but still creative imnsho.
I disagree with Dr. Kanazawa's choice of metric and especially his conclusions.
I had a chance to hear some of the American side of the story from Radia Perlman and from what little I've read it seems the RSA patent here in the US hindered adopting standards which used it - something that didn't happen in Europe. Wouldn't this real world situation make for a good argument against software patents?
You're right it is in the FAQ. I've read it and, imho, I don't think the opposition will take the same stance that the FAQ does - especially when it comes to interpretation to the Berne Convention.
imho, it was nice to see this introduced and I'll write my congresscritters saying I support it (though personally I'm lukewarm to the idea) but honestly I think this is dead in the water. The obvious complaint is that a copyright owner shouldn't have to keep track of their IP at the risk of losing it. Two, 50 years from when? Creation? Publication? Technically, when I create a work it automatically is copyrighted but what if I publish some of the poems I wrote in high school 20 years ago? Do I pay my $1 in 2053 or 2033? What if I pay in 2053 and someone says I should have paid in 2033? Now I have to go to court to retain my copyright? Three, it's going to get the flack that it makes us different from international/europoean standards.
Personally, I'd just rather see a bill introduced that flat out asks for a term with a finite length of time - say 28 years - retroactive and be done with it. Would have the same chance of passing as this proposal and make more of a statement.
I'm more than willing to concede that the patents should have been issued. I'm not willing to concede that they should be valid at this point in time.
There's the letter of the law and spirit of the law. This may be legal but it is an obvious abuse. The only just outcome is to have the patents invalidated to set a precident insuring this will not happen again.
Furthermore, no quotas on number of patent issued. Find another metric to judge an examiner's performance.
That's a start.
This btw was done on purpose.
Oh wait, you meant that PETA. Nevermind....
Thanks!
Now that's a gotcha.