But I could be way off base, or missing something.
How about the implicit assumption that the user owns his/her own data, and the implications for anyone who's using that data without permission?
I agree that selling your browsing habits probably isn't going to make you rich, but the four conditions of use suggest that you might be able to use this system to block people from spying on you.
Especially if you can demand that an abusive entity provide you with an audit and paper trail proving that they're not using any of the data you licensed under those conditions.
... Microsoft as a company is not some huge evil organization out to rape your wallets. They are regular people who want to, like anyone else, do the best job they can.
You say this as though huge evil organizations cannot be composed of regular people who just want to do the best job they can.
In fact, they are rarely made up of anything else.
"So, you're going to write your Congresscritter and ask them to allocate a bigger budget to the USPTO? Perhaps ask them to increase your taxes to help out?"
Raising fees/taxes doesn't have to be an either/or argument, though.
Perhaps we should be lobbying for a progressive fee structure, where each application costs 2% more than the last, based on the name of the patent assignee.
Consider: Application #1 costs $1000. Application #2 costs $1020. Application costs $1040.40.... Application #300 costs more than $7 million.
This would address a couple of problems from a couple of angles: 1) Small-time inventors aren't penalized 2) Patent houses start to lose their profit incentive unless 3) they start letting their inventors apply for patents in their own names
You can tweak the system further by reducing the initial fee, and the percentage, maybe by resetting the counter ever year or so.
Not that this'll get anywhere important, from a post to slashdot...
Plus, wind power is the only mitigation of global warming, because if the whole world converted to wind power in 15 years, the amount of power being extracted from the atmosphere would be more than the increase in greenhouse gas atmospheric energy forcing since 1600.
Last time I checked, thermodynamics didn't work like that.
(See, it's all well and good to extract the energy from the atmosphere, but you're just storing the energy for later. As soon as you use it, it ends up as heat.)
The only problem is: he's the Judge, he's supposed to be impartial.
Yeah, and that's why judges' opinions on hot-button issues (for example, abortion, in the US) are completely irrelevant to their nomination and acceptance into high court office.
Sounds like an interesting concept but it is unclear how the scientists will account for every source of gravity, including the elusive dark matter."
They won't. They'll do the astrogational equivalent of firing a shotgun out in front of the ship, waiting a week and seeing which particles have had their trajectories distored most severely.
Those that don't get pulled off course met the least accelleration due to gravity and friction. (Transverse redshift, blah blah blah.)
Problem solved.
(Jeez, people. Computers aren't always the best solution. Get out from behind your desks, once in a...
Would your favorite open-source project survive being sued back into the stone age?
Yes.
1: What did you do this weekend? 2: Submitted some patches on >. 1: I thought they were sued out of existence after >. 2: They were. So they sold all their assets to a group in Brazil and forfeited the cash to court. 1: What assets? It was an open-source project! 2: Well there was the code... 1: GPL'ed code? That's not worth any money! 2: I know. That's why the claimants only got a dollar fifty all together. 1: What about the group in Brazil? What are they doing with the code? 2: Letting all the developers for the submit code and continue to work.
Propellors aren't exactly nano scale. At that scale, you're emphatically not dealing with a dense medium -- you're dealing with a *vacuum*.
And legs... legs make a bloody long time to get from point A to point B, and rely on *friction* to create leverage for motion. Friction is only a few steps away from outright chemical interaction, and that's not going to go over well on delicate work surfaces.
For truly nano-scale devices, moving relatively long distances will require the use of light, probably from LEDs or sufficiently long-wavelength LASERs. These have such additional advantages of fast response, and not spewing their exhaust all over your work area.
If you do not think that this is a fair bargain, you are free to decline and to develop your own code or purchase it from someone else. You will still be allowed to use the software yourself, which is awfully nice of the developers, since you probably didn't pay them a penny for it in the first place. If you feel that this would make you a freeloading communist welfare addict, you may instead opt to purchase similar software from a less generous developer.
Or send the developers a check. Please, let's not leave that one out.
Wouldn't it be more worthwhile to create a script that *alters* the text of the EULA to something more to your liking (but still fair and legal), and then sends a copy of that new agreement to the legal department of the software company?
With a clause at the end saying "You also recognize the purchaser's right to continue use of the product until an agreement can be reached by both parties. Failure to reply within thirty days signifies your acceptance of this altered agreement. "
GPL it, give it to all your friends and encourage distribution. Watch all Hell break loose.
No. It's a visible driver. It's a very small percentage of labor devoted to lines of code, and a a very small percentage of money spent on lines of code.
A run-of-the-mill code-jockey can pretty easily pull down $60k per year in the US. That's more than a hundred copies of Microsoft Office XP at MS's recommended selling price.
What will the economic effect of having office applications open source and free of charge? Office software is infrastructure. Free office software is pretty closely equivalent to free roads and highways in the US -- a tremendous economic boon.
Slashdot Mirror
Would you pay the taxes to subsidize the petroleum indestry, so they only have to charge you $3/gallon at the pump?
Microsoft Licenses Military Shark Technology to Steer Users to Search Engine...
How about the implicit assumption that the user owns his/her own data, and the implications for anyone who's using that data without permission?
I agree that selling your browsing habits probably isn't going to make you rich, but the four conditions of use suggest that you might be able to use this system to block people from spying on you.
Especially if you can demand that an abusive entity provide you with an audit and paper trail proving that they're not using any of the data you licensed under those conditions.
A little Jedi master, have you inside yourself?
Want one, do you? Hmmm?
You say this as though huge evil organizations cannot be composed of regular people who just want to do the best job they can.
In fact, they are rarely made up of anything else.
I dearly hope you were saving most of that out-of-band salary, because now it's time to start your own company.
Furthermore, the well-educated, wealthy, successful offspring rarely meet the uneducated & poor, much less mate with them.
With two mostly-isolated breeding pools, it's possible that we're seeing the start of a further species differentiation.
"So, you're going to write your Congresscritter and ask them to allocate a bigger budget to the USPTO? Perhaps ask them to increase your taxes to help out?"
...
Raising fees/taxes doesn't have to be an either/or argument, though.
Perhaps we should be lobbying for a progressive fee structure, where each application costs 2% more than the last, based on the name of the patent assignee.
Consider:
Application #1 costs $1000.
Application #2 costs $1020.
Application costs $1040.40.
Application #300 costs more than $7 million.
This would address a couple of problems from a couple of angles:
1) Small-time inventors aren't penalized
2) Patent houses start to lose their profit incentive
unless
3) they start letting their inventors apply for patents in their own names
You can tweak the system further by reducing the initial fee, and the percentage, maybe by resetting the counter ever year or so.
Not that this'll get anywhere important, from a post to slashdot...
If you're talking to Slashdot as a whole, I'm afraid there *is* proof...
Wait...
Exactly how big is that?
In related news, there are fewer bald three-year-olds than forty year olds. From this, we can conclude that baldness has been cured.
My God, Man! What are you doing with your computer?
Last time I checked, thermodynamics didn't work like that.
(See, it's all well and good to extract the energy from the atmosphere, but you're just storing the energy for later. As soon as you use it, it ends up as heat.)
The only problem is: he's the Judge, he's supposed to be impartial.
Yeah, and that's why judges' opinions on hot-button issues (for example, abortion, in the US) are completely irrelevant to their nomination and acceptance into high court office.
Like the US Supreme Court.
Yeah.
What planet are you from?
will they come with earplugs?
...against tempest scanning, though.
Sounds like an interesting concept but it is unclear how the scientists will account for every source of gravity, including the elusive dark matter."
They won't. They'll do the astrogational equivalent of firing a shotgun out in front of the ship, waiting a week and seeing which particles have had their trajectories distored most severely.
Those that don't get pulled off course met the least accelleration due to gravity and friction.
(Transverse redshift, blah blah blah.)
Problem solved.
(Jeez, people. Computers aren't always the best solution. Get out from behind your desks, once in a...
Right. Slashdot. Got it.)
Would your favorite open-source project survive being sued back into the stone age?
Yes.
1: What did you do this weekend?
2: Submitted some patches on >.
1: I thought they were sued out of existence after >.
2: They were. So they sold all their assets to a group in Brazil and forfeited the cash to court.
1: What assets? It was an open-source project!
2: Well there was the code...
1: GPL'ed code? That's not worth any money!
2: I know. That's why the claimants only got a dollar fifty all together.
1: What about the group in Brazil? What are they doing with the code?
2: Letting all the developers for the submit code and continue to work.
Kind of like the US sees no economic benefit from being in such close contact with Mexico?
And legs... legs make a bloody long time to get from point A to point B, and rely on *friction* to create leverage for motion. Friction is only a few steps away from outright chemical interaction, and that's not going to go over well on delicate work surfaces.
For truly nano-scale devices, moving relatively long distances will require the use of light, probably from LEDs or sufficiently long-wavelength LASERs. These have such additional advantages of fast response, and not spewing their exhaust all over your work area.
If you do not think that this is a fair bargain, you are free to decline and to develop your own code or purchase it from someone else. You will still be allowed to use the software yourself, which is awfully nice of the developers, since you probably didn't pay them a penny for it in the first place. If you feel that this would make you a freeloading communist welfare addict, you may instead opt to purchase similar software from a less generous developer.
Or send the developers a check. Please, let's not leave that one out.
With a clause at the end saying "You also recognize the purchaser's right to continue use of the product until an agreement can be reached by both parties. Failure to reply within thirty days signifies your acceptance of this altered agreement. "
GPL it, give it to all your friends and encourage distribution. Watch all Hell break loose.
A run-of-the-mill code-jockey can pretty easily pull down $60k per year in the US. That's more than a hundred copies of Microsoft Office XP at MS's recommended selling price.
What will the economic effect of having office applications open source and free of charge? Office software is infrastructure. Free office software is pretty closely equivalent to free roads and highways in the US -- a tremendous economic boon.
Where can I get a copy of the Linux version, please?