I would like the surgery for two reasons...
1) Cheap $10 gas station sun glasses that I don't care if I lose. (As opposed to prescription sunglasses that cost a couple to a few hundred dollars).
2) Reading in bed, laying on your side. My vision is bad enough that reading with out glasses is a pain.
I don't want the surgery for one reason...
1) Visual aberrations at night. I enjoy astro-photography, and also concert and event photography, and I would like to know that how I see things when I push the shutter button is pretty close to how they will turn out.
If they could solve the visual aberrations , I'd do it in a heart beat.
Maybe there needs to be a financial incentive to make sure your take down notice is valid. A fine of some sort, of the take down has been found flagrantly bad.
My original Canon Digital Rebel had a feature, where you would shoot a white/neutral item, like a white sheet of paper or a grey card, and the camera would auto-set the white balance based off this.
This feature is in many digital cameras.
What kind of people does the USPTO hire, that they can not even spot obvious and common cases of prior art, like this?
The USPTO does not need reform. It need to be burnt to the ground, and restarted from scratch. I do not think the existing system works,or is salvageable.
As we all know, Net Neutrality was killed because ISPs are not willing to invest in improving bandwidth, and would rather optimize the traffic for those that pay (not based on actual customer usage). But, if the Fed resumed control of the Internet backbones, would the fed do any better, or would they use their law writing ability to restrict internet usage to try to keep us with in the bandwidth limits.
That being said, the ISP's have no interest in increasing bandwidth, either. To that end, rather than the Fed taking over the Internet as this article implies, I would rather have a legal limit on just how much an ISP can over sell their bandwidth.
But even that is just a band-aid to the real problem... Not enough competition. With merger after merger of the major ISPs and TelCos, you have very limited options in any given neighborhood for broadband. And what broadband choices we have tend to have extremely poor customer service. I think the only real answer is either offer incentives to bring new players to the market, or to break up the mega-ISPs we have now. Then instead of trying to get the most money for the least service, they would be trying to out do each other on bandwidth and other features to win customers from their local competitors.
The the projectile leaves the barrel, it is with a fiery explosion behind it. If this is from a rail gun, shouldn't the projectile be push purely by magnetic force, and there be no flames from the barrel?
Slashdot Mirror
I would like the surgery for two reasons... 1) Cheap $10 gas station sun glasses that I don't care if I lose. (As opposed to prescription sunglasses that cost a couple to a few hundred dollars). 2) Reading in bed, laying on your side. My vision is bad enough that reading with out glasses is a pain. I don't want the surgery for one reason... 1) Visual aberrations at night. I enjoy astro-photography, and also concert and event photography, and I would like to know that how I see things when I push the shutter button is pretty close to how they will turn out. If they could solve the visual aberrations , I'd do it in a heart beat.
I suspect the Comcast Rep was following his script just as he was instructed. But the Rep is an easy scapegoat for Comcast.
Maybe there needs to be a financial incentive to make sure your take down notice is valid. A fine of some sort, of the take down has been found flagrantly bad.
My original Canon Digital Rebel had a feature, where you would shoot a white/neutral item, like a white sheet of paper or a grey card, and the camera would auto-set the white balance based off this. This feature is in many digital cameras. What kind of people does the USPTO hire, that they can not even spot obvious and common cases of prior art, like this? The USPTO does not need reform. It need to be burnt to the ground, and restarted from scratch. I do not think the existing system works,or is salvageable.
As we all know, Net Neutrality was killed because ISPs are not willing to invest in improving bandwidth, and would rather optimize the traffic for those that pay (not based on actual customer usage). But, if the Fed resumed control of the Internet backbones, would the fed do any better, or would they use their law writing ability to restrict internet usage to try to keep us with in the bandwidth limits. That being said, the ISP's have no interest in increasing bandwidth, either. To that end, rather than the Fed taking over the Internet as this article implies, I would rather have a legal limit on just how much an ISP can over sell their bandwidth. But even that is just a band-aid to the real problem... Not enough competition. With merger after merger of the major ISPs and TelCos, you have very limited options in any given neighborhood for broadband. And what broadband choices we have tend to have extremely poor customer service. I think the only real answer is either offer incentives to bring new players to the market, or to break up the mega-ISPs we have now. Then instead of trying to get the most money for the least service, they would be trying to out do each other on bandwidth and other features to win customers from their local competitors.
In many areas, you only have one, maybe two choices for an ISP. This does nothing to help that. We need more competition, not more mergers.
The the projectile leaves the barrel, it is with a fiery explosion behind it. If this is from a rail gun, shouldn't the projectile be push purely by magnetic force, and there be no flames from the barrel?