It's interesting to consider the implications of such a patent as we view the 'coherent radiation hitting a stream of particles' on a smaller and smaller scale. Four elements are mentioned in the
patent:
Matter/electron/atom enters interaction,
Photon enters interaction,
Electron absorbs photon,
Matter/electron/atom leaves interaction
Ultimately we seem to end up with a patent on quantum electrodynamics (electrons interacting with photons).
Okay, you could probably use that argument on quite a few patents when you get down to the basic physics. It's interesting to ask how will patents deal with molecular/atomic nanotechnology. As manufacturing scales get smaller, and fewer particles are involved, will patenting a 'manufacturing method' turn into an attempt to patent basic chemical/physical processes?
Quick! Mirror this! Wayback machine allows authors to remove content (via a robots.txt file). It is possible SCO will request removal if they learn of its presence (probable if they track/.) and don't want it there.
I've got a theory on companies that demand excessive working hours from employees:
On a long term average, the maximum number of hours a person can work in a week is forty.
Sure, you can put in a month (year?) or more of 70 hour weeks. This will probably be followed by a month (year?) of recurring sickness, lack of motivation, whatever, bringing the average back to 40 hours/week.
No doubt many will argue against the above, but I'm basing it on observations of myself, work colleagues, family and friends over many years. It always seems that excessive working hours ultimately cause a loss of productivity, which brings the long term average back to 40hrs/week. In that case one might as well have stuck to a regular 40hr week in the first place.
As you can imagine, I've really pissed some bosses off by telling them this theory. Tell your own boss at your own peril. I'll be interested to hear, in a year, if it has applied to the people working on your project.
IBM reports that the Univeristy of Adelaide has returned its recently purchased IBM 1350 Linux cluster.
According to Mr. Ian B. Myers, an IBM technician, the cluster landed on the doorstep at White Plains, NY with a note attached reading "This bloody thing doesn't work". On testing, it was discovered that every node had been named bruce...
Doesn't a $1 payment make it a commercial transaction, which then opens up a whole new can of worms such as patents, consumer law,...?
By my reading, in Australia patents only apply to 'commercial exploitation'. Consequently, if you don't ask for payment patents can't touch you. Can anyone verify this??
Has anyone patented a business method along the lines of: 'Exploit lax patent examinations by taking take out lots of patents, then using those patents to extract money from others'?
I imagine it would be quite lucrative to license this business method to companies such as MercExchange.
It depends on whether the word 'just' is inclusive or exclusive. I suspect this is something that varies with individual usage and from country to country. Hardly rock sold stuff?
For example, "I'm not just a pretty face" can mean the person has more than looks, or if used in a self depreciating way, it can mean the person is butt ugly (and they know it).
There is also the issue of whether it is possible to have 'more than a clone'. Surely by the definition of a clone, something is either a clone or it isn't.
Peren's statement seems to be only stating the obvious: "Linix is not identical to UNIX". That statement doesn't say anything about how similar Linux is to UNIX, apart from the fact that they are not identical. Any more meaning than that is subjective. As such, it seems to be irrelevant to the case?
> "We have to remember that Linux is a follow-on to UNIX. It's not just a UNIX clone. It's actually a UNIX successor."
Bruce Perens, mpulse magazine, December 2001.
Doesn't this say Linux is not a clone (copy) of UNIX? What sort of proof is that?
Maybe someone should check SCO's stock records to make sure they haven't been bought out by indirect means by an monopolistic software company (or being paid a huge lump of cash via a company registered in the Cayman Islands)?
No time to find links, but I can provide words for
you to plug into google. For the "WiFi related" speed of 2.5Mbit/s, search on "CKK" or "Complementary Code Keying". For 802.11a related speeds, look at "COFDM" or "Coded Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing". For the 20bit/s/Hz stuff I mentioned, look at "space-time coding", "MIMO", Multiple Input Multiple Output", "BLAST" or "Bell Labs Layered Space Time".
100kbit/s is a minimum. There is no reason why a 5MHz channel cannot give 5/22 of the aggregate datarate of WiFi (=2.5Mbit/s). In the future, newer modulation schemes also offer the possibility of spectral efficiencies of the order of 20bit/s/Hz, which would give a datarate of 100Mbit/s.
Keep in touch with the BushLAN project. It is in the process of commercialisation and products should be available soon. BushLAN sounds exactly like what you are looking for.
BushLAN is a low cost 'last mile' solution specifically targeted at Internet distribution for rural areas. It uses lower frequencies (VHF) than 802.11. As a consequence the signal propagates further (3-100km). If you have television reception it should work.
I'm not directly affifialted with BushLAN, but I do work in a simliar field within the same country, so I am not completely disinterested.
If the robot is accurate enough to squirt a weed with weedkiller, why not go that extra step, do away with the pesticide and get the robot to pull the weed out?
I've probably recalled the details about envelope detection wrongly, but there are a few pages about dual frequency ionospheric correction, without P codes, in the following book:
Global Positioning System: Theory and Applications Volume I
Edited by Bradford W. Parkinson and James J. Spilker Jr.
Published by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1996
ISBN: 1-56347-106-X
My understanding is that you can use the military (L2) frequency for ionospheric correction, even if you don't have the military (P) codes (involves detecting the envelope, rather than the encrypted details of the signal). The main reason most GPS receivers don't do this is the cost of the analog components for the second, different frequency, receiver. I guess the cost of a second receiver, at a different frequency, may also be the reason for the general lack of GLONASS support.
I agree though, a dual/tri mode GLONASS/GPS/EU unit would be neat.
Despite best efforts, slabs of raw data will be out of date. Details such as the exact form of foliage would have to be filled in by an 'educated guess'. Are sensitive military facilities accurately mapped?
What indication is there to the user that the information they are viewing may not be completely accurate? How can a user judge the accuracy of each part of the scene they are viewing?
I see a danger that ultra-realistic, inaccurate, renderings may widely replace real world observations, leading to a reduction in available information, even though the volume of misinformation has increased.
The Avogadro Project's web page calls the CSIRO the "Council for Scientific and Industrial Research". This is incorrect. The CSIRO's correct name is the "Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation".
Slashdot Mirror
And the really funny bit was that when all these scientists demanded their one dollars, the government had no way to set up the necessary accounts.
- Matter/electron/atom enters interaction,
- Photon enters interaction,
- Electron absorbs photon,
- Matter/electron/atom leaves interaction
Ultimately we seem to end up with a patent on quantum electrodynamics (electrons interacting with photons).Okay, you could probably use that argument on quite a few patents when you get down to the basic physics. It's interesting to ask how will patents deal with molecular/atomic nanotechnology. As manufacturing scales get smaller, and fewer particles are involved, will patenting a 'manufacturing method' turn into an attempt to patent basic chemical/physical processes?
Quick! Mirror this! Wayback machine allows authors to remove content (via a robots.txt file). It is possible SCO will request removal if they learn of its presence (probable if they track /.) and don't want it there.
Sure, you can put in a month (year?) or more of 70 hour weeks. This will probably be followed by a month (year?) of recurring sickness, lack of motivation, whatever, bringing the average back to 40 hours/week.
No doubt many will argue against the above, but I'm basing it on observations of myself, work colleagues, family and friends over many years. It always seems that excessive working hours ultimately cause a loss of productivity, which brings the long term average back to 40hrs/week. In that case one might as well have stuck to a regular 40hr week in the first place.
As you can imagine, I've really pissed some bosses off by telling them this theory. Tell your own boss at your own peril. I'll be interested to hear, in a year, if it has applied to the people working on your project.
Do others observations back this theory up??
...it provides heaps of motivation for
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
Wireless Networks. And the government finds it pretty difficult to argue against them.
> Copyright 1996-1999, Kunihiro Ishiguro
> Copyright 1996-2001 Kunihiro Ishiguro.
> Copyright 1996-2001, Kunihiro Ishiguro.
Zebra's official GNU software, so I guess the FSF is part of the fray as well.
IBM reports that the Univeristy of Adelaide has returned its recently purchased IBM 1350 Linux cluster.
According to Mr. Ian B. Myers, an IBM technician, the cluster landed on the doorstep at White Plains, NY with a note attached reading "This bloody thing doesn't work". On testing, it was discovered that every node had been named bruce...
By my reading, in Australia patents only apply to 'commercial exploitation'. Consequently, if you don't ask for payment patents can't touch you. Can anyone verify this??
I imagine it would be quite lucrative to license this business method to companies such as MercExchange.
You get recursion when you expand the 'G' in \GNU (had to escape that 'G' so we wouldn't be here forever).
And if all else fails, there is always the HURD... :-) (seriously!)
Yeah, but these guys sound as if they have a few mainframes as big as your house!
Zap! Ow! The thought of all that pain makes my eyes water.
There is also the issue of whether it is possible to have 'more than a clone'. Surely by the definition of a clone, something is either a clone or it isn't.
Peren's statement seems to be only stating the obvious: "Linix is not identical to UNIX". That statement doesn't say anything about how similar Linux is to UNIX, apart from the fact that they are not identical. Any more meaning than that is subjective. As such, it seems to be irrelevant to the case?
Doesn't this say Linux is not a clone (copy) of UNIX? What sort of proof is that?
Maybe someone should check SCO's stock records to make sure they haven't been bought out by indirect means by an monopolistic software company (or being paid a huge lump of cash via a company registered in the Cayman Islands)?
No time to find links, but I can provide words for you to plug into google. For the "WiFi related" speed of 2.5Mbit/s, search on "CKK" or "Complementary Code Keying". For 802.11a related speeds, look at "COFDM" or "Coded Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing". For the 20bit/s/Hz stuff I mentioned, look at "space-time coding", "MIMO", Multiple Input Multiple Output", "BLAST" or "Bell Labs Layered Space Time".
100kbit/s is a minimum. There is no reason why a 5MHz channel cannot give 5/22 of the aggregate datarate of WiFi (=2.5Mbit/s). In the future, newer modulation schemes also offer the possibility of spectral efficiencies of the order of 20bit/s/Hz, which would give a datarate of 100Mbit/s.
BushLAN is a low cost 'last mile' solution specifically targeted at Internet distribution for rural areas. It uses lower frequencies (VHF) than 802.11. As a consequence the signal propagates further (3-100km). If you have television reception it should work.
I'm not directly affifialted with BushLAN, but I do work in a simliar field within the same country, so I am not completely disinterested.
If the robot is accurate enough to squirt a weed with weedkiller, why not go that extra step, do away with the pesticide and get the robot to pull the weed out?
And empowerment of all will begin to attack the real roots of terrorism: Ignorance, poverty, extremisim, ...
Global Positioning System: Theory and Applications Volume I
Edited by Bradford W. Parkinson and James J. Spilker Jr.
Published by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1996
ISBN: 1-56347-106-X
Yes, that is the genius of the GPL. The stronger copyright gets, the stronger copyleft gets.
I agree though, a dual/tri mode GLONASS/GPS/EU unit would be neat.
Despite best efforts, slabs of raw data will be out of date. Details such as the exact form of foliage would have to be filled in by an 'educated guess'. Are sensitive military facilities accurately mapped?
What indication is there to the user that the information they are viewing may not be completely accurate? How can a user judge the accuracy of each part of the scene they are viewing?
I see a danger that ultra-realistic, inaccurate, renderings may widely replace real world observations, leading to a reduction in available information, even though the volume of misinformation has increased.
The Avogadro Project's web page calls the CSIRO the "Council for Scientific and Industrial Research". This is incorrect. The CSIRO's correct name is the "Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation".