So, do you spend maybe $5000, describe to your patent lawyer what your product does and ask him for his opinion on whether MS actually owns a patent that you're infringing, or do you sign a gratis license agreement that's a little inconvenient, but a lot cheaper, but which you think you don't need... but can't be sure?
If you sign something just to be "safe", how do you really know you're safe? What rights are you giving up in order to "comply"?
Anyway, last time I checked Microsoft was a latecomer to the Internet. Most of the Internet's supporting infrastructure doesn't even run Windows. They simply cannot have ownership of TCP/IP.
The torrent link must be working now - I'm downloading 5.3-RELEASE-i386-all. I don't plan on installing it for awhile, but I'm glad to help! Currently uploading about 2x as fast as downloading.:) BitTorrent is an _excellent_ tool and sure is helping in so many legitimate ways.
Another way to think about things - which I haven't heard from anyone else yet - is that God gave living beings all we need to adapt to the changing world around us. Note how when creatures do adapt, it's not some crazy ass scheme which will be honed over millions of years. You don't see animals dying left and right because they had some nasty experiment performed on them by nature (birth defects don't count IMO). As far as I've seen, it's pretty sane stuff using existing "tools" available to the creature. We have tons of switches that can be turned on or off. I wouldn't be surprised if humans could grow a tail because in a million years it might help them... but we could grow a tail today if we threw the right switches. Could we start growing wood off our bodies to help make shelters for ourself? I highly doubt it. If evolution really was real, I don't see why that wouldn't have happened in any corner cases by now.
By the way, I'm impressed the parent was able to post something religion related and not have it marked -1 flamebait immediately. Slashdot has not been the greatest place to discuss anything that might make the rabidly anti-religious think that other possibilities just might exist.
I laughed when IBM said they were spending a billion dollars on grid computing, and I laugh now. Grid computing as something you can sell isn't going to be successful. People have really powerful computers these days, and buying lots of them is cheap. Put that together with peer-to-peer and what's the common excuse for paying someone money to use their computers? And could the providers actually make enough money for it to be profitable?
Perhaps if they can add on some value to the basic service, there might be some promise. Otherwise, I say forget it.
"This exact comment has already been posted. Try to be more original..."
I'm glad to see a new logo. Why have a project associated with the devil, whether you're religious or not?
"an evil spirit"
"an extremely wicked person"
"often capitalized : the personal supreme spirit of evil often represented in Jewish and Christian belief as the tempter of mankind, the leader of all apostate angels, and the ruler of hell -- usually used with the; often used as an interjection, an intensive, or a generalized term of abuse"
I'm glad to see a new logo. Why have a project associated with the devil, whether you're religious or not?
"an evil spirit"
"an extremely wicked person"
"often capitalized : the personal supreme spirit of evil often represented in Jewish and Christian belief as the tempter of mankind, the leader of all apostate angels, and the ruler of hell -- usually used with the; often used as an interjection, an intensive, or a generalized term of abuse"
I'm glad to see a new logo. Why have a project associated with the devil, whether you're religious or not?
"an evil spirit"
"an extremely wicked person"
"often capitalized : the personal supreme spirit of evil often represented in Jewish and Christian belief as the tempter of mankind, the leader of all apostate angels, and the ruler of hell -- usually used with the; often used as an interjection, an intensive, or a generalized term of abuse"
Re:RFID isn't a problem-free technology for retail
on
A Technical RFID Primer
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Wow, are you really that clueless? You sound like the perfect target for marketers: you'll believe what they say without question.
Who says only stores can detect your RFID's? Anybody will be able to buy a reader. That means anywhere you go, you can be identified remotely, and all your posessions you are carrying/wearing can be identified without your knowledge.
Maybe you don't care if people know you're carrying a $3000 laptop and wearing a $600 Rolex and $1000 shoes. Maybe you don't even care that they can identify _who you are_ by what you are carrying. Sure as hell lots of other people DO care.
It's such a short leap to other illegitimate uses for RFID's that I can't believe you are so blind as to not see them. Think about it, and do some more reading.
The judicial branch is definitely not immune to making judgements based on political alignment.
It's REALLY nice to see Lexmark get their ass kicked. I wrote them a letter way back when this issue was first reported and said I'd throw out my printer and advise against buying one to everyone I know if they didn't back off the DMCA claim. I did just that (and have been advising against them ever since). That's quite a few less bucks in their pocket.
Software that needs to "ask for help" is way too broad. What does this even mean? What about loading a DLL/.so into memory and calling functions? Is that asking for help? Or how about offloading processing onto a daughter board? Is that asking for help? Gimme a break.
The judge who granted Kodak the win obviously doesn't know a thing about the software industry. The case is bogus. I can't believe Sun's lawyers lost this case. Oh well, at least it's just Microsoft play money that they might have to fork over. Easy come, easy go. Of course this doesn't take into account the chilling affect a precedent like this will have on the software industry.
Entertainingly enough, most bank robbers are sufficiently deluded by their first success that they try to parlay that into a series of successes. This character weakness is generally how non-violent bank robbers get caught.
Not only that, but the draw of that "high" they felt on the first bank robbing is a powerful force. It's probably hard to resist.
We shouldn't need to educate people on how not to get kidnapped, on the evils of society, on warfare, on countless other things that are wrong with this world. But this is the world we live in. To expect that it doesn't extend into the world of computing is naive.
I was recently thinking about a technique which might be used for creating high definition stills of television programs.
The principle goes like this: you can get a view of an entire room with only a slit to look through. All you need to do is move back and forth to get the extra details.
So with the TV stills, you let the camera pan around a bit on a subject and capture all of the detail for each distinct area of the picture (eyes, whatever) since each of the raster lines on the tv are like the slit through the door. The camera panning around is like moving back and forth.
So under the right conditions like I've described, all the detail you want is there, but only when you take all the frames into consideration.
I think it's ok to kill flies to power a machine, but only in small numbers. If you kill too many flies, I for one will be happy, but all the animals in the ecosystem that depend on eating flies will suffer because of a reduced food supply.
If it weren't for animals that depended on annoying insects, I'd say kill em all, but since the ecosystem depends on them, well we have to be careful.
Personally, I feel wget is the greatest software every to hit the GNU/Linux desktop!
That's pretty funny, but it's a good example of the kind of software you should be able to get your hands on without buying it IMO. I remember back on Windows using WebWhacker (IIRC) to download full web pages/sites for browsing offline. Then I guess when it became popular it was no longer free (as in freeware). I couldn't find a free solution to do what I wanted anymore.
Enter wget. It does all that WebWhacker did and more at no cost *and* I have the source code to make changes if I want. F--kin A man.
Yes! I'm also for that suggestion. Lexmark will cost you in the end for ink cartridges. Go with laser and you won't be sorry. Sure the upfront price is usually a lot higher, but you will make that up in short time with the savings in ink cartridges vs. seldom replaced toner cartridges. I personally have a Brother 5-in-1 and it works awesome.
Does anyone know of a way to stop this kind of advertising besides turning off JavaScript in the browser?
Yeah, don't visit the site and send the feedback department a nasty letter. Float-over ads like that should be considered a traffic killer and avoided.
Yeah sure, this might be conceivable for a privately held company, but with their IPO I can't see investors going for it (since they are in it to make money, not have that warm fuzzy feeling).
The problem is, what is too loud for your ear when the cell phone is in use, is too quiet to hear when its on your belt under a jacket/sweater, so you wouldn't hear it ring/text message/low battery/etc.
What if you're not wearing the jacket?
Ok, good point. Some thoughts:
- what gives the phone the "right" create noise pollution no matter what you're doing? Maybe you have something else much more important going on at the moment? If you've left your phone in your jacket which you're not wearing, presumably you're not expecting an important phone call.
- why not put a separate speaker on the backside of the phone which can emit piercingly loud volumes?
Anyway, under no circumstances should hearing damaging volumes be used where the user puts their ears. I think that much can be said.
The problem is, what is too loud for your ear when the cell phone is in use, is too quiet to hear when its on your belt under a jacket/sweater, so you wouldn't hear it ring/text message/low battery/etc.
Why not handle that with vibrations instead of sound?
What is the maximum volume on this phone? Why not just cap the volume at a non-hearing-threatening level and be done with it? If they don't do that, isn't it just a matter of someone cranking the volume too loud, or is the low battery warning allowed to exceed the regular max. volume level?
Slashdot Mirror
So, do you spend maybe $5000, describe to your patent lawyer what your product does and ask him for his opinion on whether MS actually owns a patent that you're infringing, or do you sign a gratis license agreement that's a little inconvenient, but a lot cheaper, but which you think you don't need... but can't be sure?
If you sign something just to be "safe", how do you really know you're safe? What rights are you giving up in order to "comply"?
Anyway, last time I checked Microsoft was a latecomer to the Internet. Most of the Internet's supporting infrastructure doesn't even run Windows. They simply cannot have ownership of TCP/IP.
The torrent link must be working now - I'm downloading 5.3-RELEASE-i386-all. I don't plan on installing it for awhile, but I'm glad to help! :)
Currently uploading about 2x as fast as downloading.
BitTorrent is an _excellent_ tool and sure is helping in so many legitimate ways.
Another way to think about things - which I haven't heard from anyone else yet - is that God gave living beings all we need to adapt to the changing world around us. Note how when creatures do adapt, it's not some crazy ass scheme which will be honed over millions of years. You don't see animals dying left and right because they had some nasty experiment performed on them by nature (birth defects don't count IMO). As far as I've seen, it's pretty sane stuff using existing "tools" available to the creature. We have tons of switches that can be turned on or off. I wouldn't be surprised if humans could grow a tail because in a million years it might help them... but we could grow a tail today if we threw the right switches. Could we start growing wood off our bodies to help make shelters for ourself? I highly doubt it. If evolution really was real, I don't see why that wouldn't have happened in any corner cases by now.
By the way, I'm impressed the parent was able to post something religion related and not have it marked -1 flamebait immediately. Slashdot has not been the greatest place to discuss anything that might make the rabidly anti-religious think that other possibilities just might exist.
I laughed when IBM said they were spending a billion dollars on grid computing, and I laugh now. Grid computing as something you can sell isn't going to be successful. People have really powerful computers these days, and buying lots of them is cheap. Put that together with peer-to-peer and what's the common excuse for paying someone money to use their computers? And could the providers actually make enough money for it to be profitable?
Perhaps if they can add on some value to the basic service, there might be some promise. Otherwise, I say forget it.
"This exact comment has already been posted. Try to be more original..."
I'm glad to see a new logo. Why have a project associated with the devil, whether you're religious or not?
"an evil spirit"
"an extremely wicked person"
"often capitalized : the personal supreme spirit of evil often represented in Jewish and Christian belief as the tempter of mankind, the leader of all apostate angels, and the ruler of hell -- usually used with the; often used as an interjection, an intensive, or a generalized term of abuse"
I'm glad to see a new logo. Why have a project associated with the devil, whether you're religious or not?
"an evil spirit"
"an extremely wicked person"
"often capitalized : the personal supreme spirit of evil often represented in Jewish and Christian belief as the tempter of mankind, the leader of all apostate angels, and the ruler of hell -- usually used with the; often used as an interjection, an intensive, or a generalized term of abuse"
I'm glad to see a new logo. Why have a project associated with the devil, whether you're religious or not?
"an evil spirit"
"an extremely wicked person"
"often capitalized : the personal supreme spirit of evil often represented in Jewish and Christian belief as the tempter of mankind, the leader of all apostate angels, and the ruler of hell -- usually used with the; often used as an interjection, an intensive, or a generalized term of abuse"
Wow, are you really that clueless? You sound like the perfect target for marketers: you'll believe what they say without question.
Who says only stores can detect your RFID's? Anybody will be able to buy a reader. That means anywhere you go, you can be identified remotely, and all your posessions you are carrying/wearing can be identified without your knowledge.
Maybe you don't care if people know you're carrying a $3000 laptop and wearing a $600 Rolex and $1000 shoes. Maybe you don't even care that they can identify _who you are_ by what you are carrying. Sure as hell lots of other people DO care.
It's such a short leap to other illegitimate uses for RFID's that I can't believe you are so blind as to not see them. Think about it, and do some more reading.
The judicial branch is definitely not immune to making judgements based on political alignment.
It's REALLY nice to see Lexmark get their ass kicked. I wrote them a letter way back when this issue was first reported and said I'd throw out my printer and advise against buying one to everyone I know if they didn't back off the DMCA claim. I did just that (and have been advising against them ever since). That's quite a few less bucks in their pocket.
If you can get access to the net occasionally, I'd recommend backing your stuff up online.
There's plenty of room to improve on Google. I wish Clusty good luck and I hope the competition benefits us users all the more.
Anyone have a link to the patent?
Software that needs to "ask for help" is way too broad. What does this even mean?
What about loading a DLL/.so into memory and calling functions? Is that asking for help?
Or how about offloading processing onto a daughter board? Is that asking for help?
Gimme a break.
The judge who granted Kodak the win obviously doesn't know a thing about the software industry. The case is bogus. I can't believe Sun's lawyers lost this case.
Oh well, at least it's just Microsoft play money that they might have to fork over. Easy come, easy go. Of course this doesn't take into account the chilling affect a precedent like this will have on the software industry.
Entertainingly enough, most bank robbers are sufficiently deluded by their first success that they try to parlay that into a series of successes. This character weakness is generally how non-violent bank robbers get caught.
Not only that, but the draw of that "high" they felt on the first bank robbing is a powerful force. It's probably hard to resist.
In a nutshell: Welcome to the real world.
We shouldn't need to educate people on how not to get kidnapped, on the evils of society, on warfare, on countless other things that are wrong with this world. But this is the world we live in. To expect that it doesn't extend into the world of computing is naive.
Cool! ALE does exactly what I was thinking of. Thanks.
That sounds reasonable, but don't you think that could be accounted for in the final image?
I was recently thinking about a technique which might be used for creating high definition stills of television programs.
The principle goes like this: you can get a view of an entire room with only a slit to look through. All you need to do is move back and forth to get the extra details.
So with the TV stills, you let the camera pan around a bit on a subject and capture all of the detail for each distinct area of the picture (eyes, whatever) since each of the raster lines on the tv are like the slit through the door. The camera panning around is like moving back and forth.
So under the right conditions like I've described, all the detail you want is there, but only when you take all the frames into consideration.
I think it's ok to kill flies to power a machine, but only in small numbers. If you kill too many flies, I for one will be happy, but all the animals in the ecosystem that depend on eating flies will suffer because of a reduced food supply.
If it weren't for animals that depended on annoying insects, I'd say kill em all, but since the ecosystem depends on them, well we have to be careful.
Personally, I feel wget is the greatest software every to hit the GNU/Linux desktop!
That's pretty funny, but it's a good example of the kind of software you should be able to get your hands on without buying it IMO.
I remember back on Windows using WebWhacker (IIRC) to download full web pages/sites for browsing offline. Then I guess when it became popular it was no longer free (as in freeware). I couldn't find a free solution to do what I wanted anymore.
Enter wget. It does all that WebWhacker did and more at no cost *and* I have the source code to make changes if I want. F--kin A man.
Yes! I'm also for that suggestion. Lexmark will cost you in the end for ink cartridges. Go with laser and you won't be sorry. Sure the upfront price is usually a lot higher, but you will make that up in short time with the savings in ink cartridges vs. seldom replaced toner cartridges.
I personally have a Brother 5-in-1 and it works awesome.
Does anyone know of a way to stop this kind of advertising besides turning off JavaScript in the browser?
Yeah, don't visit the site and send the feedback department a nasty letter. Float-over ads like that should be considered a traffic killer and avoided.
Yeah sure, this might be conceivable for a privately held company, but with their IPO I can't see investors going for it (since they are in it to make money, not have that warm fuzzy feeling).
The problem is, what is too loud for your ear when the cell phone is in use, is too quiet to hear when its on your belt under a jacket/sweater, so you wouldn't hear it ring/text message/low battery/etc.
What if you're not wearing the jacket?
Ok, good point. Some thoughts:
- what gives the phone the "right" create noise pollution no matter what you're doing? Maybe you have something else much more important going on at the moment? If you've left your phone in your jacket which you're not wearing, presumably you're not expecting an important phone call.
- why not put a separate speaker on the backside of the phone which can emit piercingly loud volumes?
Anyway, under no circumstances should hearing damaging volumes be used where the user puts their ears. I think that much can be said.
The problem is, what is too loud for your ear when the cell phone is in use, is too quiet to hear when its on your belt under a jacket/sweater, so you wouldn't hear it ring/text message/low battery/etc.
Why not handle that with vibrations instead of sound?
What is the maximum volume on this phone? Why not just cap the volume at a non-hearing-threatening level and be done with it? If they don't do that, isn't it just a matter of someone cranking the volume too loud, or is the low battery warning allowed to exceed the regular max. volume level?