But who do I get in touch with, there is absolutly no information about what to do if or when you find a candidate. This is off the latest colour photo data and is located between the place he took off and the last location he was known to be.
Talking about cloning, I stil lthing the design in the 6th day has a lot of promise. If they can nail the technology in this prototype, then craft of this type may become a reality for sooner than we think.
*** Reconnecting to MSN as "croyles@hotmail.com". *** Will attempt 10 connections with 60 second intervals. *** Connecting to MSN as "croyles@hotmail.com", attempt #1. *** Lost connection to server. Err 0:0
Just noted the 'Filed in 1996' so appologies for not checking the Patent submission. I will check my references in my publications as I am sure I refer to studies that pre date 1996.
My PhD thesis describes a solution along these lines in great detail. First prototype built prior to 1998 and details published 1998. Final thesis published in 2000.
Intelligent Interaction Between the User and Online Legal Content.
Used tailored HTML based on a knowledge base contained both in the HTML and in the users client machine. Used cookies as a key to reference the users remote knowledge base that was stored on the server and to maintain state during traversal through linked documents.
The first prototype was builtin 1998, I have thesis and published papers that state this point. The main publication details are listed here.
C.A. Royles and T.J.M. Bench-Capon,(1998), Dynamic Tailoring of Law Related Documents to User Needs.9th International Workshop on Database and Expert System Applications, 1998. IEEE, pp609
Its an IEEE publication so should be easy to track down.
Surely something published in 1998 should make it VERY difficult to apply for a patent on. Obviously I was unable to patent the solution because I had published it to the public domain.
I have simply sent them an email and more importantly a 'letter' that informs Verisign that I do not accept their terms of service and that I am seeking their advice on how to stop making use of their software, considering I do not meet their terms of service.
I have informed them that if they cannot stop providing me with this service, (for which I do not accept their terms, and by which I cannot be bound) then they will have to contact me to negotiate a new set of terms to which I do agree.
I would imagine that if every user that is upset by this new 'service' was to do the same then Verisign would have to do 'something' about it.
I am no expert here, but I would imagine SCO has placed a copy of their code someplace independant.
Just strikes me that with Linux source out in the open, SCO have had a looooong time to change their records.
Of course they would not dream of doing this, various external parties have access to the source base, but to point at a section of code and say it is the same. Where is this code stored, is it in an independant, safe, tamper proof location out of the reach of SCO and anybody else for that matter?
Brings me to an interesting point, any companioes you work for, especially the small ones, who actually place copies of their code in an independant location incase copyright becomes an issue? I always thought you needed to go through some specific proceedures to 'proove' your version is the original.
Are Reasoning going to release their actual line by line error reports back the the open source community.
This activity they have carried out has given them great publicity on the back of the open source communities hard efforts. Lets see something back in return.
Also, note that 'errors per thousand lines' actually means 'potential per thousand lines', that means under certain conditions an error [may] occur, it does not mean an error [will] occur.
Suprised they got their mits on the source of a closed project such that they could publish. Maybe they counted the number of defects raised and compared this to the total lines in the project? Heh more eyes in the open world to track down and raise those bugs?
Actually 'this guy' is using the 'mouse click' features of Borland BES as well as BEA Weblogic.
Both of which 'cost and arm and a leg' for the documentation then rip you off totally when it comes to support.
Also the documentation on clustering for BES is very lightweight. YOu are looking at committing thousands to put together even the most basic clustered solution.
Will investigate your recommendations further though.
Slashdot Mirror
I have found a plane.
3841'54.33"N
119 2'14.44"W
But who do I get in touch with, there is absolutly no information about what to do if or when you find a candidate.
This is off the latest colour photo data and is located between the place he took off and the last location he was known to be.
Talking about cloning, I stil lthing the design in the 6th day has a lot of promise. If they can nail the technology in this prototype, then craft of this type may become a reality for sooner than we think.
Trillian v0.74 PatchD - not working!
Error
*** Reconnecting to MSN as "croyles@hotmail.com".
*** Will attempt 10 connections with 60 second intervals.
*** Connecting to MSN as "croyles@hotmail.com", attempt #1.
*** Lost connection to server. Err 0:0
Just noted the 'Filed in 1996' so appologies for not checking the Patent submission. I will check my references in my publications as I am sure I refer to studies that pre date 1996.
My PhD thesis describes a solution along these lines in great detail. First prototype built prior to 1998 and details published 1998. Final thesis published in 2000.
Intelligent Interaction Between the User and Online Legal Content.
Used tailored HTML based on a knowledge base contained both in the HTML and in the users client machine. Used cookies as a key to reference the users remote knowledge base that was stored on the server and to maintain state during traversal through linked documents.
The first prototype was builtin 1998, I have thesis and published papers that state this point. The main publication details are listed here.
C.A. Royles and T.J.M. Bench-Capon,(1998), Dynamic Tailoring of Law Related Documents to User Needs.9th International Workshop on Database and Expert System Applications, 1998. IEEE, pp609
Its an IEEE publication so should be easy to track down.
Surely something published in 1998 should make it VERY difficult to apply for a patent on. Obviously I was unable to patent the solution because I had published it to the public domain.
I have simply sent them an email and more importantly a 'letter' that informs Verisign that I do not accept their terms of service and that I am seeking their advice on how to stop making use of their software, considering I do not meet their terms of service.
I have informed them that if they cannot stop providing me with this service, (for which I do not accept their terms, and by which I cannot be bound) then they will have to contact me to negotiate a new set of terms to which I do agree.
I would imagine that if every user that is upset by this new 'service' was to do the same then Verisign would have to do 'something' about it.
I am no expert here, but I would imagine SCO has placed a copy of their code someplace independant.
Just strikes me that with Linux source out in the open, SCO have had a looooong time to change their records.
Of course they would not dream of doing this, various external parties have access to the source base, but to point at a section of code and say it is the same. Where is this code stored, is it in an independant, safe, tamper proof location out of the reach of SCO and anybody else for that matter?
Brings me to an interesting point, any companioes you work for, especially the small ones, who actually place copies of their code in an independant location incase copyright becomes an issue? I always thought you needed to go through some specific proceedures to 'proove' your version is the original.
Are Reasoning going to release their actual line by line error reports back the the open source community.
This activity they have carried out has given them great publicity on the back of the open source communities hard efforts. Lets see something back in return.
Also, note that 'errors per thousand lines' actually means 'potential per thousand lines', that means under certain conditions an error [may] occur, it does not mean an error [will] occur.
Suprised they got their mits on the source of a closed project such that they could publish. Maybe they counted the number of defects raised and compared this to the total lines in the project? Heh more eyes in the open world to track down and raise those bugs?
Actually 'this guy' is using the 'mouse click' features of Borland BES as well as BEA Weblogic.
Both of which 'cost and arm and a leg' for the documentation then rip you off totally when it comes to support.
Also the documentation on clustering for BES is very lightweight. YOu are looking at committing thousands to put together even the most basic clustered solution.
Will investigate your recommendations further though.
Thanks for all the responses and detail. JBoss comes up a lot... I will investigate this further. Good points about sessions and DB usage.
I thought at this stage in J2EE development, clustering would be well understood and available 'out of the box'.
Thanks, Royles