What you guys don't realize is that third pary vendors have been doing this for quite some time. You pay them the one time fee for the software and then a small "Maintenance" fee each month to receive the next upgrade for free.
I know that large buisnesses have been doing this for a long time.
I've often considered turning my thermistat into a "smart thermistat"
To do this, I would modify each vent in my house to use a motor to turn a screw that would open and close the vent. I would also attach a thermistor to measure the temperature coming out of the vent. Finally, I would use some sort of wireless transmitter in combination with a thermistor to transmit the actual room temperatures back to the thermistat.
I've often found that the biggest problem in most thermistat setups is that the thermistat sits somewhere it shouldn't such as near a vent or window. This fools it into thinking the temperature is either much cooler or warmer than it really is. By using a wireless transmitter, it would be easy to relocate based on window locations, vent locations and even furnature arangement.
This sounds like it places an id unique to you all over your hard drive. Sounds like it will have the same effect that Intel's built-in unique ID could have had. Except, this time it's likely to make it to market.
I'm terribly dissapointed that Apple has licensed Amazon's 1-Click patent. It is rediculously simple to implement as any web developer will tell you. We would much rather see you defend your rights in court rather than support invalid patents such as this one.
A door knob has primitive technology behind it, but you can't patent "single-pull" doors because it's too obvious. I don't know how build a door knob, but I do know how to build a website.
By comparison to the music industry, I'm starting to think that Microsoft isn't all that bad after all.
Wouldn't they be a great ally to have in this stupid battle? Maybe Microsoft would have the money to do one last thing before they get broken up...release the source code to a ****REALLY**** nice DVD player. Then, help us fight it in court.
I guess advertising on the internet is as inevitable as advertising on radio. In twenty years, no-one will even think twice about the fact that the internet requires everyone to watch at ads.
The reason that we have Skins and that nobody follows a standard (even Microsoft breaks its own guidelines) is because the perfect user interface has yet to be innovated.
Consistency is good for end users. You could create a skin that looks just like the standard X, but obviously no-one has because the demand just isn't there for that application.
Application GUI's need to be built for their target audience. If the target audience will be living in the application, then more guidelines can be broken as long as you keep an eye on the learning curve.
I for one know that if I only use an application once a year, I want it to be all spelled out in front of me with step by step instructions. A good example of this is when I setup my firewall, dns, and sendmail. These kinds of applications need GUI's that follow the standards very strictly because I don't want to have to deal with learning a new interface while I'm busy stumbling around trying to figure out what values I need to enter because I've forgotten what I did three years ago when I first setup my machine. (the skills are not revisited often enough and any special functionality in the GUI is useless if it isn't standard.)
NOTE: Under MS Windows this is not a problem because the machine crashes often enough to need reloading every six months. (and therefore I will remember whatever quirks are in the configuration GUIS)
However, when I use an application often enough, I don't need it all spelled out and there can be special GUI functionality that does not follow the standard. For instance, in Netscape is Ctl-N to open a new window. Does it follow the standard? No, but it is well known because of the amount of time that we all spend in Netscape.
Lastly, when applications have special, non-conforming functionality, we should look at the applicability to other applications and integration into the standard.
If someone had said "We're going to organize a group of voulenteres (spelling?) to write our own unix clone to compete with MS" he'd have been laughed off the face of the planet!
Somehow, this "Herculean" job was accomplished. So, excuse me if I say so, but you far under-estimate our abilities to accomplish the tasks we find deeply important to us.
We may not agree on how something should be done, but at least we agree that something needs to be done. As it stands today, _Nothing_ is being done.
Public Law 106-113 introduces a new "inter partes" patent reexamination procedure that lets any third-party initiate an interactive reexamination of a patent based on new evidence of prior art. By facilitating the two-way exchange of argument and evidence, the PTO hopes to mediate many of the disputes that currently end up in legal action. When a reexamination leads to a finding that patent claims or portions of patent claims are invalid due to the existence of legitimate prior art, the claims can be stricken or revised in reasonable ways and a "reissue patent" will be published. A patent may even be declared invalid in its entirety as a result of reexamination. Providing this inter partes reexamination mechanism should avoid a lot of unnecessary lawsuits and keep the PTO squarely in the middle, and therefore accountable for its mistakes, when infringement or interference disputes arise.
Yes, I think it is a factor in your salary...all you have to do is say: "You obviously expect me to do some work at home...so, lets factor in an extra 10% for all that time you don't want to pay me for."
I'd like to see all the major computer companies do this. After all, the computer portion of it is cheap. It's only when the employee says "You expect me to work at home, so you must fix my problems..." that it actually has some cost to it.
I work at AMD and our cubicals are $1500/month/employee. Computers are nothing by comparison.
I'm no expert with ADS, but anyone with a little knowledge of large data tables understands the necessity of indexes...it looks to me like they did not install the indexing component...which could cause exactly what they showed in this document.
Slashdot Mirror
With this code available, wouldn't it be relatively easy to code up a replacement in a more sane language with a more sane packaging system?
Surely someone wants to lead a project with this much visibility...
What you guys don't realize is that third pary vendors have been doing this for quite some time. You pay them the one time fee for the software and then a small "Maintenance" fee each month to receive the next upgrade for free.
I know that large buisnesses have been doing this for a long time.
Josh
What do people think they hope to accomplish with this silly liscense? To prove that no-one will pay it any attention or what?
Josh
I've often considered turning my thermistat into a "smart thermistat"
To do this, I would modify each vent in my house to use a motor to turn a screw that would open and close the vent. I would also attach a thermistor to measure the temperature coming out of the vent. Finally, I would use some sort of wireless transmitter in combination with a thermistor to transmit the actual room temperatures back to the thermistat.
I've often found that the biggest problem in most thermistat setups is that the thermistat sits somewhere it shouldn't such as near a vent or window. This fools it into thinking the temperature is either much cooler or warmer than it really is. By using a wireless transmitter, it would be easy to relocate based on window locations, vent locations and even furnature arangement.
Josh
Leaving us with what we started with...
A group of people who a knowledgeable.
If new features in the new version can save $$$money$$$, then the old version is broken.
This sounds like it places an id unique to you all over your hard drive. Sounds like it will have the same effect that Intel's built-in unique ID could have had. Except, this time it's likely to make it to market.
- Josh
I sent Apple the letter below:
I'm terribly dissapointed that Apple has licensed Amazon's 1-Click patent. It is rediculously simple to implement as any web developer will tell you. We would much rather see you defend your rights in court rather than support invalid patents such as this one.
A door knob has primitive technology behind it, but you can't patent "single-pull" doors because it's too obvious. I don't know how build a door knob, but I do know how to build a website.
Thank you,
Joshua
By comparison to the music industry, I'm starting to think that Microsoft isn't all that bad after all.
Wouldn't they be a great ally to have in this stupid battle? Maybe Microsoft would have the money to do one last thing before they get broken up...release the source code to a ****REALLY**** nice DVD player. Then, help us fight it in court.
Ok, I'm done with pipe, anyone else want a hit?
I guess advertising on the internet is as inevitable as advertising on radio. In twenty years, no-one will even think twice about the fact that the internet requires everyone to watch at ads.
In case you hadn't noticed, this is the same business that is going to sell your email address to spam and other targeted advertising methods.
This is not a a respectable company!
I think it would be interesting for you to try all three of these and then post the results publicaly of which ones are bringing in the most money:
Lobby for someone to help foot the initial bill. (IBM is betting the house on Linux...I bet they'd do it.)
Accept PayPal donations from individuals/small business.
And, have a low ($5/month absolute tops) subscription rate and to keep the site updated regularly. (billable through PayPal!)
Josh
I send the EFF an $80 check each month with only my email address on it.
Others should do similarly,
Josh
However, there is a short license agreement at the bottom of every page and the full agreement on pages 11 and 12.
So, I guess that my winzip idea is worthless...
Did I mention that you can bypass the license agreement by opening the executable with WinZip and not ever executing the thing?
Have fun!
Josh
The reason that we have Skins and that nobody follows a standard (even Microsoft breaks its own guidelines) is because the perfect user interface has yet to be innovated.
Consistency is good for end users. You could create a skin that looks just like the standard X, but obviously no-one has because the demand just isn't there for that application.
Application GUI's need to be built for their target audience. If the target audience will be living in the application, then more guidelines can be broken as long as you keep an eye on the learning curve.
I for one know that if I only use an application once a year, I want it to be all spelled out in front of me with step by step instructions. A good example of this is when I setup my firewall, dns, and sendmail. These kinds of applications need GUI's that follow the standards very strictly because I don't want to have to deal with learning a new interface while I'm busy stumbling around trying to figure out what values I need to enter because I've forgotten what I did three years ago when I first setup my machine. (the skills are not revisited often enough and any special functionality in the GUI is useless if it isn't standard.)
NOTE: Under MS Windows this is not a problem because the machine crashes often enough to need reloading every six months. (and therefore I will remember whatever quirks are in the configuration GUIS)
However, when I use an application often enough, I don't need it all spelled out and there can be special GUI functionality that does not follow the standard. For instance, in Netscape is Ctl-N to open a new window. Does it follow the standard? No, but it is well known because of the amount of time that we all spend in Netscape.
Lastly, when applications have special, non-conforming functionality, we should look at the applicability to other applications and integration into the standard.
Sorry for the rant.
Josh
I admit that my experience with W2k Kerberos is minimal at best...but when you say something, at least try not to sound dumb.
Or, did you mean to say that it is standard to use a custom in house kerberos?? I hope not!
Oh, and I'm not advocating W2k...I'm just ranting. I dislike MS as much as the next person.
Yes...and an unthinkable amount of it (1 rather full DVD for the Jan 2000 Docs) is documentation.
So, don't install the documentation if your space is all that sparce.
If someone had said "We're going to organize a group of voulenteres (spelling?) to write our own unix clone to compete with MS" he'd have been laughed off the face of the planet!
Somehow, this "Herculean" job was accomplished. So, excuse me if I say so, but you far under-estimate our abilities to accomplish the tasks we find deeply important to us.
We may not agree on how something should be done, but at least we agree that something needs to be done. As it stands today, _Nothing_ is being done.
Josh
I found this exerpt to be of particular interest:
Public Law 106-113 introduces a new "inter partes" patent reexamination procedure that lets any third-party initiate an interactive reexamination of a patent based on new evidence of prior art. By facilitating the two-way exchange of argument and evidence, the PTO hopes to mediate many of the disputes that currently end up in legal action. When a reexamination leads to a finding that patent claims or portions of patent claims are invalid due to the existence of legitimate prior art, the claims can be stricken or revised in reasonable ways and a "reissue patent" will be published. A patent may even be declared invalid in its entirety as a result of reexamination. Providing this inter partes reexamination mechanism should avoid a lot of unnecessary lawsuits and keep the PTO squarely in the middle, and therefore accountable for its mistakes, when infringement or interference disputes arise.
Yes, I think it is a factor in your salary...all you have to do is say: "You obviously expect me to do some work at home...so, lets factor in an extra 10% for all that time you don't want to pay me for."
:-)
Josh
I'd like to see all the major computer companies do this. After all, the computer portion of it is cheap. It's only when the employee says "You expect me to work at home, so you must fix my problems..." that it actually has some cost to it.
I work at AMD and our cubicals are $1500/month/employee. Computers are nothing by comparison.
Josh
IMO, any product that relies highly upon knowledge is a definate candidate for "Open"-ness.
The Open model fails as soon as money starts to interfere. (remember man-power is almost free in an Open world)
The law says nothing about encryption...
It says no person shall circumvent an effective technological measure used to protect a copyright holder's work.
I'm no expert with ADS, but anyone with a little knowledge of large data tables understands the necessity of indexes...it looks to me like they did not install the indexing component...which could cause exactly what they showed in this document.