I flush out all of the advertisers cookies on a regular basis. I'm assuming that this will cause them to build up zillions of one off database entries. I'm making some assumptions here about how they do their database.
I keep thinking there must be a way to filter what gets exchanged when I go to a web site. I don't want to shut off cookies, too many user id's and passwords. Someone with a little more knowledge about how all of this works may want to comment
Let me know if I'm wrong, the single stroke well differentiated character set seems to be the essence of the patent. The distinction between unistroke and conventional recogition seems clear, thereby negating the cries of prior art posted here. It is interesting that the patent was filed only recently, could this have escaped 3com's notice because it was "submarined" ???
Don't look at the first page of the patent, that part is not what is relevant - look at the claims and the specific clauses within a claim. Claim 1 on page nine of the patent seems reasonably broad and covers the use of an unspecified alphabet along with the hardware interface - looks to me like it covers what 3com did. This alone should be enough to claim infringemnt. (those more versed in patent law might want to comment)
Janet Reno et al. do not make theses policies. They come from up from the DOJ and FBI staff. One has to assume that these people already know that U.S. policies will have little effect on the global availability of encryption technologies. So what is the real story here... what is it that leaves them so worried.
I personally believe that they would like to hinder the whole encryption industry as much as possible. Limiting sales to the U.S. makes the whole business unattractive and helps slow wide spread adoption of encrypted communications. This in turn reduces the volume of encrypted traffic they have to deal with. Volume is important because they are reading everything.
There is a lot of evidence (I.E. the recent reports from the EU) that they are particularly interested in commercial traffic. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe most commercial encryption is still DES. Adoption of a new standard (one not designed by them) might upset things a little bit
Janet Reno et al. do not make theses policies. They come from up from the DOJ and FBI staff. One has to assume that these people already know that U.S. policies will have little effect on the global availability of encryption technologies. So what is the real story here... what is it that leaves them so worried.
I personally believe that they would like to hinder the whole encryption industry as much as possible. Limiting sales to the U.S. makes the whole business unattractive and helps slow wide spread adoption of encrypted communications. This in turn reduces the volume of encrypted traffic they have to deal with. Volume is important because they are reading everything.
There is a lot of evidence (I.E. the recent reports from the EU) that they are particularly interested in commercial traffic. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe most commercial encryption is still DES. Adoption of a new standard (one not designed by them) might upset things a little bit
Actually it would work, especially if you provide a high surface, high emissivity heatsink. Satellite infrared detectors have used radiative cooling for years
The events of last week caused a lot of bitter memories to come flooding back to me. Its been 20 years now since I graduated from high school, but the anger, the fear, and the loathing are still very much with me.
I found some of the thoughts crossing my mind more than a little frightening. I knew those kids, I knew their anger and I knew their pain. I have also known parents who lost a child, and I could never wish that sort of devastation upon anyone.
How could I possibly show any sympathy for a pair of very cold blooded killers ??? The answer might be something along the lines of "there but for the grace of God go I", and that is the frightening part.
After thinking about things for a while I came up with the answer.
In retrospect I have been very fortunate. I now have a sucessful consulting business and I enjoy a comforable income. I have little to complain about now. I have done quite well in my own little niche.
So what was the answer ??
The things which set me apart where not the causes of my exclusion, they were the means of my escape.
After reading the messages left here and elsewhere on the web I realized that I am not alone, and I have not been alone. So many people asking the same questions.
To the high school geeks, dorks, nerds et al. who might be reading this: never let them get to you. In the end we always win by either by action or by attrition. If you should choose action, choose it carefully. Make sure that what you get is really what you want. Those two poor bastards in Colorado wanted death and that is what they got. And what changed.
Slashdot Mirror
I flush out all of the advertisers cookies on
a regular basis. I'm assuming that this
will cause them to build up zillions of one off database entries. I'm making some
assumptions here about how they do their database.
I keep thinking there must be a way to filter what
gets exchanged when I go to a web site. I don't
want to shut off cookies, too many user id's and passwords.
Someone with a little more knowledge about
how all of this works may want to comment
Let me know if I'm wrong, the single stroke well
differentiated character set seems to be the
essence of the patent. The distinction between
unistroke and conventional recogition seems clear,
thereby negating the cries of prior art posted
here. It is interesting that the patent
was filed only recently, could this have
escaped 3com's notice because it was
"submarined" ???
Don't look at the first page of
the patent, that part is not
what is relevant - look at
the claims and the specific
clauses within a claim. Claim
1 on page nine of the patent
seems reasonably broad and
covers the use of an unspecified
alphabet along with the hardware
interface - looks to me like it
covers what 3com did. This alone
should be enough to claim infringemnt.
(those more versed in patent law might
want to comment)
Janet Reno et al. do not make theses policies.
They come from up from the DOJ and FBI staff.
One has to assume that these people already
know that U.S. policies will have little effect
on the global availability of encryption
technologies. So what is the real story here...
what is it that leaves them so worried.
I personally believe that they would like to
hinder the whole encryption industry as much
as possible. Limiting sales to the U.S. makes
the whole business unattractive and helps
slow wide spread adoption of encrypted
communications. This in turn reduces the
volume of encrypted traffic they have to
deal with. Volume is important because they
are reading everything.
There is a lot of evidence (I.E. the recent reports from the EU) that they
are particularly interested in commercial
traffic. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe most commercial encryption is still DES.
Adoption of a new standard (one not designed by them) might upset things a little bit
Janet Reno et al. do not make theses policies.
They come from up from the DOJ and FBI staff.
One has to assume that these people already
know that U.S. policies will have little effect
on the global availability of encryption
technologies. So what is the real story here...
what is it that leaves them so worried.
I personally believe that they would like to
hinder the whole encryption industry as much
as possible. Limiting sales to the U.S. makes
the whole business unattractive and helps
slow wide spread adoption of encrypted
communications. This in turn reduces the
volume of encrypted traffic they have to
deal with. Volume is important because they
are reading everything.
There is a lot of evidence (I.E. the recent reports from the EU) that they
are particularly interested in commercial
traffic. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe most commercial encryption is still DES. Adoption of a new standard (one not designed by them) might upset things a little bit
Actually it would work, especially if you
provide a high surface, high emissivity heatsink.
Satellite infrared detectors have used radiative
cooling for years
The events of last week caused a lot of bitter
memories to come flooding back to me. Its been
20 years now since I graduated from high school,
but the anger, the fear, and the loathing are still very much with me.
I found some of the thoughts crossing my mind more
than a little frightening. I knew those kids, I knew their anger and I knew their pain. I have also known parents who lost a child, and I could never wish that sort of devastation upon anyone.
How could I possibly show any sympathy for a
pair of very cold blooded killers ??? The answer
might be something along the lines of "there but
for the grace of God go I", and that is the frightening part.
After thinking about things for a while I came up with the answer.
In retrospect I have been very fortunate. I now have a sucessful consulting business and I enjoy a comforable income. I have little to complain about now. I have done quite well in my own little niche.
So what was the answer ??
The things which set me apart where not the causes of my exclusion, they were the means of my escape.
After reading the messages left here and elsewhere
on the web I realized that I am not alone, and I
have not been alone. So many people asking the
same questions.
To the high school geeks, dorks, nerds et al. who
might be reading this: never let them get to you. In the end we always win by either by action or by attrition. If you should choose action, choose it carefully. Make sure that what you get is really
what you want. Those two poor bastards in Colorado wanted death and that is what they got.
And what changed.