That's like saying you can rape your wife because, at one point, she gave consent. It's completely idiotic.
Sorry, but by the time they've split up, he has withdrawn consent, and if she wishes to have a child he has the right to say "not with my sperm you don't". What's that, you now can't have children unless they're mine? Too damned bad.
This is very different from forcing her to abort a fetus, because it's outside of her body and frozen -- which means it's a tissue sample until someone goes to fairly extraordinary lengths to put it back.
I don't think this is nearly as cut and dry as people think. You can't just say "it's her egg, and he's already knocked her up"... because she isn't pregnant, and this isn't about what she can do with her own body.
Is her ex legally required to have a child with her now that they've split up? Because it's not like in most cases you knock up your ex long after the breakup.
Suddenly a tissue sample in cold storage comes down to "can she force him to have a child with her now"? Because since it's not in her body, it's not like that is the deciding factor.
In other words, they lie so damned much about what they're selling you so that if you upgrade to the next tier they just might be giving you what they charge you for now?
Sounds like a pile of shit to me.
(Not what you say, it probably echoes what the assholes at Verizon say)
Like all things.. if the technology extends how far someone without mad skills can shoot, it means the people with mad skills will be able to shoot even further.
This may improve overall efficiency, but it doesn't seem like the kind of thing which is going to leave actual snipers thinking "damn, if only I had a useful skill".
I'm also betting in your example of GPS, they subsequently rediscovered that if you don't have the underlying navigation skills you're pretty much screwed when the technology goes ofline.
Would you trust the guys that infected your system, removed your access to files, ransomed the decryption key from you etc. to correctly - and perfectly - restore your untouched data?
Of course I wouldn't trust them. I don't trust anybody.
But my distrust starts at the front door, and I wouldn't have likely trusted whatever vector leads to this stuff... because I've learned not to trust the internet at all. Or at least to not give it access to my machine and click on stuff embedded in web pages.
But the people who find themselves in this mess have fewer options, and are apparently more likely to trust stupid random crap in the first place.
When my parents first got on the intertubes, I sat them down and had the talk telling them the internet was full of lying, thieving bastards, and should be treated skeptically and warily, and that everything should be presumed to be a lie on behalf of crooks and assholes. On the phone, in person, and on the internet my parents are pretty damned good at spotting potential bullshit and scams -- because they listened to me.
Oddly enough, if you start out assuming the internet is a hostile place, you don't run into as many problems.
And yet loads of people fall for the fake Microsoft tech support calls pretty much daily, along with all of the other scams.
What you and I would experience is very different from someone willing to believe internet ads and that people aren't primarily out there to rip you off.
Other people will see an ad that says "click here for a chance to win something" and click on damned near anything without the barest notion that it could be a Really Fucking Stupid Idea.
Sorry, what? 2-4 amount to "waaah, I don't want to actually learn the stuff I'm taking in school because it's too hard and gets in the way of my social life".
The answer to this is "too fucking bad".
Everyone else who got an education had to deal with this stuff too.
I'm afraid I have zero sympathy for a bunch of kids who think it takes too much effort to complete their education.
How is it "free of charge" if you have to share revenue?
No up front costs... and if you don't develop for that platform and make money from it, you're giving up precisely NOTHING. If you do, you're giving up a cut.
This summary reads like a press release.
Of course it's a press release. The byline is "Alice MacGregor, CloserStill Media" -- my guess is CloserStill Media has skin in the game, or has been hired to promote this.
You aren't honestly expecting investigative journalism, are you?
These days, the majority of internet news articles are thinly disguised press releases, or syndicated stories which appear verbatim in a bunch of other sites.
Since most people who will be subject to ransomware have no way of knowing the mechanics of the encryption (or wouldn't be able to access it anyway)... does that they lied about their super secret crypto make a damned bit of difference?
Most people would care more about blocking whatever vector for this crap is causing it instead of the technical details of the crypto.
What sort of country is it where one gets on sex offenders register for having a blowjob in a car?
One with deeply entrenched moral puritanism which says "sex is bad, we don't want to know about sex, and we don't want to educate our children about sex in the hopes they won't have any until marriage".
Two words apply here HORSE and SHIT. What you just posted supposes that those who write software and patent it will have no choice but to sell their warez to Google.
No, you're a fucking idiot, AC.
This marketplace is for Google to buy patents, nothing more.
I never said anybody had no choice but to sell to Google. What I am saying is this marketplace Google is setting up last about a week or two, and the only buyer is Google. There simply is no other buyer in this marketplace. That's it.
The rest you can fuck off about.
TFA is quite explicit:
On its new online portal, patent holders will be able to essentially list the patents they have for sale, and set their own prices. The marketplace will not remain open indefinitely, however. Instead, Google says that it will go live on May 8, 2015, and will be available through May 22, 2015. The decision to keep it open only for a limited time means Google will have to work quickly to determine which patents it wants to buy, which benefits sellers in need of a more immediate decision.
If Google decides to buy a patent, it says it will work through due diligence with the company, and close the transaction "in short order." In fact, the company says it anticipates that all patent sellers will be paid by late August by way of an ACH bank transfer.
The portal is only open to U.S. patent submissions, it should be noted.
Google stresses also that this program is only an experiment -- equating it to a 20 percent project for Google's patent lawyers, which refers to Google's program that once allowed employees to spend some portion of their time with the company working on unofficial projects that may or may not be continued or eventually translated into new lines of business.
Has it occurred to you that you might be too stupid to understand the article and what I posted?
Google is not creating a general market for patents. They are making one in which people can offer to sell to Google before selling to "other" patent trolls.
It's not a horrible contract if both parties agreed to it
It's a horrible contract if it purports to require that consumers pay ESPN even if they don't want it. In fact, that's arguably illegal.
It's not good for the customer, but no one is forced to sign up for cable
Seriously? That's the best you have? It's OK for asshole cable companies to force you to buy something you don't want, and if you don't like that you're free to not have cable at all?
Complete and utter fucking nonsense.
Sorry, but ESPN has no legal standing to force the consumers of Verizon to essentially have a package which kicks back to ESPN.
That should get you a RICO conviction. Because if someone says "oh, sorry, but we have a contract with my cousin Vinnie, and you have to pay him every time you buy something from us".
This IS NOT a patent clearing house. Not by a long shot.
This is Google setting up a market place where people can offer to sell Google, and ONLY Google, the opportunity to buy patents. Nobody else will be able to purchase patents with this.
This is the Google looking to expand its own patent portfolio.
This has NOTHING to do with a bunch of mini patent trolls -- just one fucking big one.
Is ESPN somehow asserting that Verizon signed a contract requiring all of its customers receive ESPN?
Because that sounds like a load of horseshit to me.
This is all about broadcasters acting like their service is intrinsic to receiving cable, and that consumers should be required to subsidize their revenues.
So if you need a framework so you can pretend to have a native version of the application... why not just focus on having a webpage instead of a shitty application which is just a web page?
This sounds like lazy people who want to claim they have an app, when all they're doing is pointing to a web page.
I can view your damned web page on my own.
Honestly, this is why I've started getting away from apps... because as often as not they're badly written, and contain a fraction of the information I can get from the website, but still insist on having access to my contact list and messages.
Most people writing apps care more about invading my privacy and selling ads than actually providing me anything useful.
Sorry, but am I supposed to believe this will create anything other than a different kind of patent troll?
Putting a bunch more patents into Google's hands doesn't prevent them from being patent trolls. This is purely about letting Google buy more patents, not protecting us from patent trolls.
Slashdot Mirror
Now there's a technology fail for you.
Reminds me of a US naval ship being towed to shore because Windows NT crashed.
I guess this is a problem when you have consumer technology being used in mission critical environments.
That's like saying you can rape your wife because, at one point, she gave consent. It's completely idiotic.
Sorry, but by the time they've split up, he has withdrawn consent, and if she wishes to have a child he has the right to say "not with my sperm you don't". What's that, you now can't have children unless they're mine? Too damned bad.
This is very different from forcing her to abort a fetus, because it's outside of her body and frozen -- which means it's a tissue sample until someone goes to fairly extraordinary lengths to put it back.
I don't think this is nearly as cut and dry as people think. You can't just say "it's her egg, and he's already knocked her up" ... because she isn't pregnant, and this isn't about what she can do with her own body.
Is her ex legally required to have a child with her now that they've split up? Because it's not like in most cases you knock up your ex long after the breakup.
Suddenly a tissue sample in cold storage comes down to "can she force him to have a child with her now"? Because since it's not in her body, it's not like that is the deciding factor.
Well, since I know nothing about the material properties of transparent aluminum ....
Is it a rigid/bendy metal, or is it a rigid/brittle metal? (Those are technical terms I just made up.)
A rigid/bendy material won't necessarily break, so maybe shards of shattered transparent aluminum isn't an issue?
But by all means, in loving memory of James Doohan, let us all rejoice in transparent aluminum being a real thing. =)
An iPhone made out of transparent aluminum?
Where the hell do I sign up for one of those?
Put your firewall behind their router?
Yes, you have to use theirs to connect to the network .. but then you don't trust it and use your own.
Or, will that not work for you?
Because there's no way in hell I'd plug my PC directly into a router provided by my ISP. No fucking way. I trust neither them nor their security.
Hell, I'm not even on the same router/wifi network as my wife, we both have a router connected to the ISPs router.
It's just a device which gets a DHCP address, isn't it?
In other words, they lie so damned much about what they're selling you so that if you upgrade to the next tier they just might be giving you what they charge you for now?
Sounds like a pile of shit to me.
(Not what you say, it probably echoes what the assholes at Verizon say)
Like all things .. if the technology extends how far someone without mad skills can shoot, it means the people with mad skills will be able to shoot even further.
This may improve overall efficiency, but it doesn't seem like the kind of thing which is going to leave actual snipers thinking "damn, if only I had a useful skill".
I'm also betting in your example of GPS, they subsequently rediscovered that if you don't have the underlying navigation skills you're pretty much screwed when the technology goes ofline.
Of course I wouldn't trust them. I don't trust anybody.
But my distrust starts at the front door, and I wouldn't have likely trusted whatever vector leads to this stuff ... because I've learned not to trust the internet at all. Or at least to not give it access to my machine and click on stuff embedded in web pages.
But the people who find themselves in this mess have fewer options, and are apparently more likely to trust stupid random crap in the first place.
When my parents first got on the intertubes, I sat them down and had the talk telling them the internet was full of lying, thieving bastards, and should be treated skeptically and warily, and that everything should be presumed to be a lie on behalf of crooks and assholes. On the phone, in person, and on the internet my parents are pretty damned good at spotting potential bullshit and scams -- because they listened to me.
Oddly enough, if you start out assuming the internet is a hostile place, you don't run into as many problems.
And yet loads of people fall for the fake Microsoft tech support calls pretty much daily, along with all of the other scams.
What you and I would experience is very different from someone willing to believe internet ads and that people aren't primarily out there to rip you off.
Other people will see an ad that says "click here for a chance to win something" and click on damned near anything without the barest notion that it could be a Really Fucking Stupid Idea.
Sorry, what? 2-4 amount to "waaah, I don't want to actually learn the stuff I'm taking in school because it's too hard and gets in the way of my social life".
The answer to this is "too fucking bad".
Everyone else who got an education had to deal with this stuff too.
I'm afraid I have zero sympathy for a bunch of kids who think it takes too much effort to complete their education.
If all of the people coming out of your school have diplomas, but no clue ... eventually people look at diplomas from your school as being worthless.
Oddly enough, people expect diploma actually translates into "has received an education".
In all honesty, Americans don't get vote on how to spell a measurement they don't use.
The meter of your diction isn't measured in metres.
OK, you cal lit meter, I'll call it Americow. :-P
Man, no wonder Americans can't figure out metric ... people like you keep confusing the crap out of them.
And it's "metre" not "meter" .. another Americansism which is incorrect.
Oh, come now ... we can't suddenly start claiming that is true.
Wholesale copy-and-paste, typos and all, have been staples of /. articles for a very long time now.
No up front costs ... and if you don't develop for that platform and make money from it, you're giving up precisely NOTHING. If you do, you're giving up a cut.
Of course it's a press release. The byline is "Alice MacGregor, CloserStill Media" -- my guess is CloserStill Media has skin in the game, or has been hired to promote this.
You aren't honestly expecting investigative journalism, are you?
These days, the majority of internet news articles are thinly disguised press releases, or syndicated stories which appear verbatim in a bunch of other sites.
Since most people who will be subject to ransomware have no way of knowing the mechanics of the encryption (or wouldn't be able to access it anyway) ... does that they lied about their super secret crypto make a damned bit of difference?
Most people would care more about blocking whatever vector for this crap is causing it instead of the technical details of the crypto.
One with deeply entrenched moral puritanism which says "sex is bad, we don't want to know about sex, and we don't want to educate our children about sex in the hopes they won't have any until marriage".
In other words, a deeply irrational one.
No, you're a fucking idiot, AC.
This marketplace is for Google to buy patents, nothing more.
I never said anybody had no choice but to sell to Google. What I am saying is this marketplace Google is setting up last about a week or two, and the only buyer is Google. There simply is no other buyer in this marketplace. That's it.
The rest you can fuck off about.
TFA is quite explicit:
Has it occurred to you that you might be too stupid to understand the article and what I posted?
Google is not creating a general market for patents. They are making one in which people can offer to sell to Google before selling to "other" patent trolls.
Yeah, ridiculously expensive, extremely over-complicated, and in the end of dubious value.
We're supposed to believe this will "[pass] light around the individual drops and improving visibility"?
My initial read of TFS was that it sounded like so much marketing crap.
It's a horrible contract if it purports to require that consumers pay ESPN even if they don't want it. In fact, that's arguably illegal.
Seriously? That's the best you have? It's OK for asshole cable companies to force you to buy something you don't want, and if you don't like that you're free to not have cable at all?
Complete and utter fucking nonsense.
Sorry, but ESPN has no legal standing to force the consumers of Verizon to essentially have a package which kicks back to ESPN.
That should get you a RICO conviction. Because if someone says "oh, sorry, but we have a contract with my cousin Vinnie, and you have to pay him every time you buy something from us".
Yeah, sorry. fuck that.
This IS NOT a patent clearing house. Not by a long shot.
This is Google setting up a market place where people can offer to sell Google, and ONLY Google, the opportunity to buy patents. Nobody else will be able to purchase patents with this.
This is the Google looking to expand its own patent portfolio.
This has NOTHING to do with a bunch of mini patent trolls -- just one fucking big one.
Is ESPN somehow asserting that Verizon signed a contract requiring all of its customers receive ESPN?
Because that sounds like a load of horseshit to me.
This is all about broadcasters acting like their service is intrinsic to receiving cable, and that consumers should be required to subsidize their revenues.
Fuck you, ESPN.
So if you need a framework so you can pretend to have a native version of the application ... why not just focus on having a webpage instead of a shitty application which is just a web page?
This sounds like lazy people who want to claim they have an app, when all they're doing is pointing to a web page.
I can view your damned web page on my own.
Honestly, this is why I've started getting away from apps ... because as often as not they're badly written, and contain a fraction of the information I can get from the website, but still insist on having access to my contact list and messages.
Most people writing apps care more about invading my privacy and selling ads than actually providing me anything useful.
You know nobody gives a crap, right?
Sorry, but am I supposed to believe this will create anything other than a different kind of patent troll?
Putting a bunch more patents into Google's hands doesn't prevent them from being patent trolls. This is purely about letting Google buy more patents, not protecting us from patent trolls.
Greedy bastards.