heres some ideas for how to make things better
on
The Return of Apollo?
·
· Score: 1
option 1.use a combination of a railgun and a rocket engine or engines. i.e. you fire the railgun so that it can get some fast speed then when its high enough and going fast, it can fire a nice efficiant rocket engine to reach escape velocity and LEO. The rocket itself could either be some kind of nice reusable booster or better yet a dirt cheap "dumb booster" that isnt reusable but is made as cheap as possible (i.e. just a fuel tank with a rocket nozzle on the end) Then you have a payload section (basicly it would be a metal shell around whatever payload for example ISS parts or whatever) with some kind of capsule to hold the people and tools on the top.
The capsule would land using parachutes (like the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo capsules did), be collected and inspected and then reused.
option 2.use a fast, high-flying supersonic airplane that would carry a booster rocket up to high-altitude and up to a fast speed and have the booster attatched to the top or bottom of the plane, which would then ignite and fire to reach LEO.
After the rocket has been launched, the plane can land like any other high-flying supersonic airplane for reuse. The rocket itself could either be some kind of nice reusable booster or better yet a dirt cheap "dumb booster" that isnt reusable but is made as cheap as possible (i.e. just a fuel tank with a rocket nozzle on the end). Then you have a payload section (basicly it would be a metal shell around whatever payload for example ISS parts or whatever) with some kind of capsule to hold the people and tools on the top.
The capsule would land using parachutes (like the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo capsules did), be collected and inspected and then reused.
possible reasons: 1.there is no code 2.there is code but its not enabled by default in most kernels 3.there is code but its for features that most people arent using and that (once we know what they are) can be removed from our kernels (thus meaning that we no longer have any code that is copyright SCO or that is derived from that) 4.there is code that was taken from UNIX and put into Linux but its not (C) SCO or 5.there is code that was taken from UNIX and put into Linux but that code was released by SCO under a licence that makes it ok to use (like when they released all those old historic UNIX versions a while back)
Dont tax the phone company, broadband provider or VOIP co. Tax whoever owns the copper wires (ultimatly you are paying them some kind of line rental fee anyway) For example, if you have Vonage VoIP over Covad DSL over Verizon lines, you pay Covad for the DSL service. Covad then pays (or mabie you pay directly, I dont know exactly how it works in america since I dont live there) Verizon for the copper wire. Therefore, you pay Verizon (directly or indirectly) and Verizon pays the tax to the government.
i.e. move away from taxing those who provide phone service and start taxing those who actually carry that phone service.
1.ISPs should only block ports used by known malware and no others (ISPs should never ever do things with SMTP, FTP, HTTP etc, well except mabie SMTP for Anti-SPAM purposes) and 2.ISPs should unblock ports for anyone that needs them unblocked (and it shouldnt cost anything)
That way, we get less "cluless user ran a trojan horse or got infeceted with a virus and is now flooding the net with crap" but it doesnt block ports used for legitimate applications (now and into the future) nor does it prevent power users from getting what they want.
1.Applicants must show a working example of their patent that implements all the claims contained in the patent. If they dont, they dont get the patent. (this would probobly get rid of some of the shonky patents)
2.The patent office should do better searches for prior art and if things are found that should have been found by the applicant, the applicant must pay the patent office money (to discorage the filing of "obvious" patents and so on)
3.If you dont enforce your patent, you risk loosing it (i.e. it would be similar to what happens with trademarks now). This would actually be good since it would prevent things like what happened in the Unisys LZW case.
4.Once a patent has been submitted, it cant be changed. Also, the patent must be published publicly as soon as it is submitted. (as a Pending Patent or something) Also, the date a patent expires goes from when the patent was submitted not when it was granted. (this would prevent e.g. patents that are submitted then modified then modified again then delayed and so on in an attempt to make the patent last longer)
and 5.You cant patent a formula or algortihim (genetic, biological, chemical or mathematical). This would mean that patenting individual genes or whole organisims would be illegal. As would patenting software algortihims like encryption, compression and so on. An example here might be a test for breast cancer that looks for a breast cancer gene. You can claim a patent over your specific way of finding that one gene from all the others (assuming that there is no prior art of course) but you cant patent the gene itself or patent "testing for breast canser by finding this gene".
At my school (Murdoch University, Perth, Australia) they use windows for most labs simply because thats what everyone knows how to use. They do have linux labs that are used for units on unix and security and so on. (in fact, the security unit I am doing right now uses that security book mentioned on the front page as a text book)
And generally there hasnt been any "over-use" of M$ products. JAVA has been used for some units. There was one unit that used VB but that was optional and I only did it because it was so laughingly easy. Most of the units use things like HTML, Javascript, PHP, Perl, XML and other open stuff. C & C++ has been used in some units (at the time they used Borland C++ 5 or something, may be using MS now) but it was all vanila coding and wasnt relyant on any propriatory stuff provided by the compiler. They are using Access in the databases unit but they are also using Oracle running on a SUN machine (as opposed to e.g. SQL server on a windows box).
Some other units have used non-MS propriatory stuff (like Matlab in the maths unit).
I think there is some kind of site-licence/academic deal for MS software on campus but I think the uni actually had to pay for it.
So at least one campus hasnt been assimilated by the M$ borg.
Basicly, people are listening to the SCO claim of "code x looks like code y" and not to the claim of "yes but it was never SCOs in the first place/it was released under a free licence" simply because right now those claims havent been legally proven. For example, the claim of "the code was released under a free licence", its not possible for the unwashed masses to know for sure that the copy of the code in the kernel started out as the "under a free licence" version and not some other "SCO copyright" version. Also, its not yet possible to prove the claim "it wasnt SCOs in the first place" since its not possible to be 100% legally binding sure yet that the code SCO is showing isnt SCOs Anyhow, I just wish the court case would begin so that SCO is forced to show everything it has and we can begin in ernest looking for reasons why SCOs claims are garbage
The "cheap" laptops tend to include bargain basement software modems, integrated lower-end video chipsets and the like.
Software modems are always going to be a problem, one alternative there is to simply get a PC card modem that linux supports.
Graphics chipsets for example are also going to be a problem simply because even though there may be good linux support for desktop chipsets/cards like the GeForce4MX 440 (which is what I have), getting the manufacturers to support the laptop and "integrated" chipsets is harder.
Although there is an answer to the whole display drivers issue. Move to a 3-part driver. Part 1 would be like the miniport driver on windows and would contain all the actual low-level driver support. This bit would reside in the kernel and would ideally be Open Source or at the very least have "open glue code" like the current NVIDIA drviers do. This part would also include enough to get text mode going properly. Part 2 would be like the DDI driver on windows and would convert the data from x-windows, svgalib or whatever else into the cards native format. This could sit in userland space and wouldnt be loaded until a graphical app was loaded. It would talk to the kernel portion via a special call that would enable 2-way communication between both halves in a way that is driver-specific but at the same time independant from changes to the kernel. Part 3 would then be the 3d portion of the driver and would be written to work specificly with OpenGL.
only allows linux to be used and doesnt allow any pirated games to be played (i.e. it would be pre-flashed with a linux bios image that had no (C) microsoft code in it)
Also, it could be built to boot bootable cdroms (such as a sutably modified knoppix disk or something), so that you could e.g. modify the installer for a sutable linux distro and make a set of ISOs ready to install that would give you e.g. red hat or mandrake or whatever with sutable mods for xbox and xbox h/w
Since the digital signature on xbox disks is the "access control" and since this doesnt allow one to play xbox games, pirated or otherwise and since it doesnt circumvent the "access control" as far as I can see (although IANAL and I dont know exactly what the relavent laws say)
Given that the chip would be flashable, someone would come up with a bootable ISO that will put some other bios (such as "lets you play pirate games" one) on there but since the chip makers arent selling it or even linking to it, they cant get in trouble for it.
Why is allowing one company to own both a TV station and a newspaper in one location bad. There is almost certainly going to be another TV station and another newspaper available in the area that you can switch to. I think that changing the rules to basicly say "no one company may own more than one of a particular media type (TV, radio, newspaper) in a particular area" would be the ideal way to go. It would stop any one company from owning all the media in one area and would also force companies that already own more than one of a given media type in a given area to sell off some of their extra assets (e.g. clearchannel)
Why not introduce watermarking of music sold via online means or otherwise. Basicly, anytime you buy music, something that could be traced back to you would be embedded in the download by the software on the music site. Then, if you copy that, the RIAA can check for watermarks and find out who origonaly copied that file and therefor who to sue for all they have.
Microsoft should have EOLd Windows NT4 and especially 98/98SE/ME months ago (i.e. when XP came out).
I never used NT4 so I cant comment on it but Windows 98/98SE/ME is the biggest piece of crap I have ever seen. There is no reason on this earth why ANYONE should need windblows 9x/ME anymore unless you have ancient hardware and cant run Windows 2000 or Windows XP.
Someone should make a set-top-box thats a cross between: A PC A Games machine (perhaps) A PVR A DVD player/burner
Basicly, it would be a quiet-design, small-size PC with reasonable hardware and in a box that works well with your home entertainment box. Give it a USB thingo with a keyboard and trackball to use as input. And make it so you can plug in things like digital cameras, gamepads etc. Then build in a ethernet port for network access and TV in/out for display and input of stuff. And give it a big disk to store stuff Also put in a DVD drive (perhaps with a DVD burner or one of those DVD drive/CD buruner combo) as options. Build it around linux (because its free & its open, make all the software for this thing open) and bundle: PVR software to make it work like a PVR DVD player/burner software Multimedia software so you can play audio, video and so on (by downloading it over the ethernet port or from CDs/DVDs containing audio or video data e.g. audio CDs, VCDs or whatever else the multimedia player supports.
So, basicly, this box would be usefull to: 1.record shows from the TV 2.play back the recorded shows 3.transfer the recorded shows over the ethernet link 4.burn the recorded shows to optical media (if you get the burner option) 5.watch DVDs, VCDs and whatever other video CD formats you want to install players for 6.watch video files in any format you have a player for 7.listen to Audio CDs and audio files in any format (being based on linux, supporting OGG for example would be dead simple)
You could also run anything else the hardware could support on it (for example, games or emulators).
Basicly, it would be a ready-made PC in a box designed to fit with an existing stereo, TV, VCR etc and capable of doing multimedia things. Would come with the software preinstalled and a nice GUI interface for the non-technical but those that know how could run anything from MAME to quake on it (if the hardware is up to it).
1.require that anyone filing a patent show a completly working example of whatever it is they are patenting. (and the patent should provide all details necessary to re-create that working example) 2.once a patent application has been filed, that application cant be amended. If it gets approved, it gets approved as-is. If it gets rejected, tough. 3.remove all the "loopholes" that allow patent holders to get longer than they should out of a patent. and 4.implement a "enforce it or lose it" rule for patents like there is for trademarks. Basicly, if you dont enforce your patent for anyone who is violating it, you could lose it. This will mean: A.patents like the LZW patent will come to light straight away (if the GIF people had known about the LZW patent, would they still have used LZW? I think not.) B.since companies with potentially shaky patents (like PanIP) have to take on everyone and cant pick on the small fish, they might be less likely to risk this (since when they take on a bigger fish with money, they may lose in court & lose thir patent) and C.since there will be many more patent violations happening, mabie something will give and there will be changes to just what can be patented.
Because if they do, this will happen: 1.SCO reveals code 2.IBM, red hat et al remove or re-write the code and give "fixes" to their customers 3.IBM, red hat et al can then say "yes we were using your code but we stopped as soon as we found out about it" which means that SCO cant do things like filing an injunction that says "if you use our code, you have to pay us mega $$$" and 4.it becomes a LOT harder for SCO to sue individuals and corperations that are using AIX/Linux/etc (because they will have applied the "fixes" from IBM, red hat et al and therefore its up to SCO to show that they were previously using SCO IP which is harder to do than showing that the users are currently using SCO ip.
Personally, I think IBM should argue that unless SCO shows it the code, there is no way that it can comply with a "dont use our code" injunction.
Telstra: 1.keeps increasing telephone charges (line rental in particular keeps going up and up). 2.has expensive costs for getting phone line hooked up in the first place. 3.owns all the local phone system and most of the national phone network. 4.owns a large amount of the national data networks. and 5.rips off ADSL customers (both its own and its competitors)
The basic problem is that if you want to have ADSL connected (no matter which ISP) you need to pay a large connection fee, a big chunk of which goes to telstra. And, you also need to pay a large monthly fee, a large bit of which goes to telstra for line-rental and crap.
Basicly, telstra is a monopoly and like many monopolies, it abuses that power. And our government doesnt give a stuff.
Another thing to remember is that ever since the first geek set-up the first BBS all those years ago, telcos have tried to stop the growth of online communications.
That they dont define what constitutes a "communications device" accuratly enough. This leaves a big loophole for the telcos, cable companies etc to exploit.
For example, is the modem on my desk the "origin/destination of the communications"? Is it the port/motherboard/other hardware in the computer? Is it the drivers, network dll files & TCP/IP stack? Is it the internet clients (like Mozilla or Trillian for example)?
1.make a special BIOS that will load an appropriate boot-loader or kernel somehow (something like that XBOX linux bios). Then sell all mod chips with this BIOS pre-loaded. If it detects that the disk in the drive is a bootable kernel or etc it will boot from there else it will boot from the XBOX hard disk. This can be used as-is for XBOX linux. But for those that want a BIOS to play "unsigned xbox software" (such as import titles or some of the xbox emulators floating around), what there would be is a small program that gets put onto a disk & fed into the XBOX which boots & runs it. This program would copy another bootable program to the XBOX HD. The program on the XBOX HD would basicly contain the equivilant of an existing mod BIOS. So, if someone wants to play unsigned crap (such as imports or emulators), they can: buy this mod chip (which doesnt have any M$ code on it nor does it allow the playing of XBOX games, signed or unsigned, therefore M$ has a lot less chance of sucess if they try to sue) then either A.re-flash it with some pirate bios from the net (the person selling the chips in the first place would only offer them with this bios) or B.grab the program that installs the "boot-loader" onto the XBOX hard disk. That "boot-loader" would then substitute for the real XBOX bios & load the appropriate XBE file or whatever.
That way, M$ has less avenues to sue the mod-chip sellers. The person making & distributing the "boot-loader" can do so anonymously or something so that they cant be caught by M$.
Slashdot Mirror
option 1.use a combination of a railgun and a rocket engine or engines. i.e. you fire the railgun so that it can get some fast speed then when its high enough and going fast, it can fire a nice efficiant rocket engine to reach escape velocity and LEO. The rocket itself could either be some kind of nice reusable booster or better yet a dirt cheap "dumb booster" that isnt reusable but is made as cheap as possible (i.e. just a fuel tank with a rocket nozzle on the end) Then you have a payload section (basicly it would be a metal shell around whatever payload for example ISS parts or whatever) with some kind of capsule to hold the people and tools on the top.
The capsule would land using parachutes (like the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo capsules did), be collected and inspected and then reused.
option 2.use a fast, high-flying supersonic airplane that would carry a booster rocket up to high-altitude and up to a fast speed and have the booster attatched to the top or bottom of the plane, which would then ignite and fire to reach LEO.
After the rocket has been launched, the plane can land like any other high-flying supersonic airplane for reuse. The rocket itself could either be some kind of nice reusable booster or better yet a dirt cheap "dumb booster" that isnt reusable but is made as cheap as possible (i.e. just a fuel tank with a rocket nozzle on the end). Then you have a payload section (basicly it would be a metal shell around whatever payload for example ISS parts or whatever) with some kind of capsule to hold the people and tools on the top.
The capsule would land using parachutes (like the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo capsules did), be collected and inspected and then reused.
possible reasons:
1.there is no code
2.there is code but its not enabled by default in most kernels
3.there is code but its for features that most people arent using and that (once we know what they are) can be removed from our kernels (thus meaning that we no longer have any code that is copyright SCO or that is derived from that)
4.there is code that was taken from UNIX and put into Linux but its not (C) SCO
or 5.there is code that was taken from UNIX and put into Linux but that code was released by SCO under a licence that makes it ok to use (like when they released all those old historic UNIX versions a while back)
Dont tax the phone company, broadband provider or VOIP co.
Tax whoever owns the copper wires (ultimatly you are paying them some kind of line rental fee anyway)
For example, if you have Vonage VoIP over Covad DSL over Verizon lines, you pay Covad for the DSL service. Covad then pays (or mabie you pay directly, I dont know exactly how it works in america since I dont live there) Verizon for the copper wire.
Therefore, you pay Verizon (directly or indirectly) and Verizon pays the tax to the government.
i.e. move away from taxing those who provide phone service and start taxing those who actually carry that phone service.
1.ISPs should only block ports used by known malware and no others (ISPs should never ever do things with SMTP, FTP, HTTP etc, well except mabie SMTP for Anti-SPAM purposes)
and 2.ISPs should unblock ports for anyone that needs them unblocked (and it shouldnt cost anything)
That way, we get less "cluless user ran a trojan horse or got infeceted with a virus and is now flooding the net with crap" but it doesnt block ports used for legitimate applications (now and into the future) nor does it prevent power users from getting what they want.
Run it under WINE :)
1.Applicants must show a working example of their patent that implements all the claims contained in the patent. If they dont, they dont get the patent. (this would probobly get rid of some of the shonky patents)
2.The patent office should do better searches for prior art and if things are found that should have been found by the applicant, the applicant must pay the patent office money (to discorage the filing of "obvious" patents and so on)
3.If you dont enforce your patent, you risk loosing it (i.e. it would be similar to what happens with trademarks now). This would actually be good since it would prevent things like what happened in the Unisys LZW case.
4.Once a patent has been submitted, it cant be changed. Also, the patent must be published publicly as soon as it is submitted. (as a Pending Patent or something) Also, the date a patent expires goes from when the patent was submitted not when it was granted. (this would prevent e.g. patents that are submitted then modified then modified again then delayed and so on in an attempt to make the patent last longer)
and 5.You cant patent a formula or algortihim (genetic, biological, chemical or mathematical).
This would mean that patenting individual genes or whole organisims would be illegal. As would patenting software algortihims like encryption, compression and so on. An example here might be a test for breast cancer that looks for a breast cancer gene. You can claim a patent over your specific way of finding that one gene from all the others (assuming that there is no prior art of course) but you cant patent the gene itself or patent "testing for breast canser by finding this gene".
At my school (Murdoch University, Perth, Australia) they use windows for most labs simply because thats what everyone knows how to use. They do have linux labs that are used for units on unix and security and so on. (in fact, the security unit I am doing right now uses that security book mentioned on the front page as a text book)
And generally there hasnt been any "over-use" of M$ products. JAVA has been used for some units. There was one unit that used VB but that was optional and I only did it because it was so laughingly easy.
Most of the units use things like HTML, Javascript, PHP, Perl, XML and other open stuff.
C & C++ has been used in some units (at the time they used Borland C++ 5 or something, may be using MS now) but it was all vanila coding and wasnt relyant on any propriatory stuff provided by the compiler.
They are using Access in the databases unit but they are also using Oracle running on a SUN machine (as opposed to e.g. SQL server on a windows box).
Some other units have used non-MS propriatory stuff (like Matlab in the maths unit).
I think there is some kind of site-licence/academic deal for MS software on campus but I think the uni actually had to pay for it.
So at least one campus hasnt been assimilated by the M$ borg.
Basicly, people are listening to the SCO claim of "code x looks like code y" and not to the claim of "yes but it was never SCOs in the first place/it was released under a free licence" simply because right now those claims havent been legally proven. For example, the claim of "the code was released under a free licence", its not possible for the unwashed masses to know for sure that the copy of the code in the kernel started out as the "under a free licence" version and not some other "SCO copyright" version. Also, its not yet possible to prove the claim "it wasnt SCOs in the first place" since its not possible to be 100% legally binding sure yet that the code SCO is showing isnt SCOs
Anyhow, I just wish the court case would begin so that SCO is forced to show everything it has and we can begin in ernest looking for reasons why SCOs claims are garbage
The "cheap" laptops tend to include bargain basement software modems, integrated lower-end video chipsets and the like.
Software modems are always going to be a problem, one alternative there is to simply get a PC card modem that linux supports.
Graphics chipsets for example are also going to be a problem simply because even though there may be good linux support for desktop chipsets/cards like the GeForce4MX 440 (which is what I have), getting the manufacturers to support the laptop and "integrated" chipsets is harder.
Although there is an answer to the whole display drivers issue. Move to a 3-part driver. Part 1 would be like the miniport driver on windows and would contain all the actual low-level driver support. This bit would reside in the kernel and would ideally be Open Source or at the very least have "open glue code" like the current NVIDIA drviers do. This part would also include enough to get text mode going properly.
Part 2 would be like the DDI driver on windows and would convert the data from x-windows, svgalib or whatever else into the cards native format. This could sit in userland space and wouldnt be loaded until a graphical app was loaded. It would talk to the kernel portion via a special call that would enable 2-way communication between both halves in a way that is driver-specific but at the same time independant from changes to the kernel.
Part 3 would then be the 3d portion of the driver and would be written to work specificly with OpenGL.
only allows linux to be used and doesnt allow any pirated games to be played (i.e. it would be pre-flashed with a linux bios image that had no (C) microsoft code in it)
Also, it could be built to boot bootable cdroms (such as a sutably modified knoppix disk or something), so that you could e.g. modify the installer for a sutable linux distro and make a set of ISOs ready to install that would give you e.g. red hat or mandrake or whatever with sutable mods for xbox and xbox h/w
Since the digital signature on xbox disks is the "access control" and since this doesnt allow one to play xbox games, pirated or otherwise and since it doesnt circumvent the "access control" as far as I can see (although IANAL and I dont know exactly what the relavent laws say)
Given that the chip would be flashable, someone would come up with a bootable ISO that will put some other bios (such as "lets you play pirate games" one) on there but since the chip makers arent selling it or even linking to it, they cant get in trouble for it.
Why is allowing one company to own both a TV station and a newspaper in one location bad. There is almost certainly going to be another TV station and another newspaper available in the area that you can switch to. I think that changing the rules to basicly say "no one company may own more than one of a particular media type (TV, radio, newspaper) in a particular area" would be the ideal way to go. It would stop any one company from owning all the media in one area and would also force companies that already own more than one of a given media type in a given area to sell off some of their extra assets (e.g. clearchannel)
Why not introduce watermarking of music sold via online means or otherwise. Basicly, anytime you buy music, something that could be traced back to you would be embedded in the download by the software on the music site. Then, if you copy that, the RIAA can check for watermarks and find out who origonaly copied that file and therefor who to sue for all they have.
That makes it illegal for company x to use the DMCA to prevent a 3rd party company making hardware or software compatible with company x's hardware.
The code to whatever custom build of GCC was used to compile the things in the first place...
Microsoft should have EOLd Windows NT4 and especially 98/98SE/ME months ago (i.e. when XP came out).
I never used NT4 so I cant comment on it but Windows 98/98SE/ME is the biggest piece of crap I have ever seen. There is no reason on this earth why ANYONE should need windblows 9x/ME anymore unless you have ancient hardware and cant run Windows 2000 or Windows XP.
For the UI, just use KDE or Gnome or something. Writing a simple menuing system would be dead simple. (IMO)
Someone should make a set-top-box thats a cross between:
A PC
A Games machine (perhaps)
A PVR
A DVD player/burner
Basicly, it would be a quiet-design, small-size PC with reasonable hardware and in a box that works well with your home entertainment box. Give it a USB thingo with a keyboard and trackball to use as input. And make it so you can plug in things like digital cameras, gamepads etc.
Then build in a ethernet port for network access and TV in/out for display and input of stuff.
And give it a big disk to store stuff
Also put in a DVD drive (perhaps with a DVD burner or one of those DVD drive/CD buruner combo) as options.
Build it around linux (because its free & its open, make all the software for this thing open) and bundle:
PVR software to make it work like a PVR
DVD player/burner software
Multimedia software so you can play audio, video and so on (by downloading it over the ethernet port or from CDs/DVDs containing audio or video data e.g. audio CDs, VCDs or whatever else the multimedia player supports.
So, basicly, this box would be usefull to:
1.record shows from the TV
2.play back the recorded shows
3.transfer the recorded shows over the ethernet link
4.burn the recorded shows to optical media (if you get the burner option)
5.watch DVDs, VCDs and whatever other video CD formats you want to install players for
6.watch video files in any format you have a player for
7.listen to Audio CDs and audio files in any format (being based on linux, supporting OGG for example would be dead simple)
You could also run anything else the hardware could support on it (for example, games or emulators).
Basicly, it would be a ready-made PC in a box designed to fit with an existing stereo, TV, VCR etc and capable of doing multimedia things. Would come with the software preinstalled and a nice GUI interface for the non-technical but those that know how could run anything from MAME to quake on it (if the hardware is up to it).
1.require that anyone filing a patent show a completly working example of whatever it is they are patenting. (and the patent should provide all details necessary to re-create that working example)
2.once a patent application has been filed, that application cant be amended. If it gets approved, it gets approved as-is. If it gets rejected, tough.
3.remove all the "loopholes" that allow patent holders to get longer than they should out of a patent.
and 4.implement a "enforce it or lose it" rule for patents like there is for trademarks.
Basicly, if you dont enforce your patent for anyone who is violating it, you could lose it. This will mean:
A.patents like the LZW patent will come to light straight away (if the GIF people had known about the LZW patent, would they still have used LZW? I think not.)
B.since companies with potentially shaky patents (like PanIP) have to take on everyone and cant pick on the small fish, they might be less likely to risk this (since when they take on a bigger fish with money, they may lose in court & lose thir patent)
and C.since there will be many more patent violations happening, mabie something will give and there will be changes to just what can be patented.
Because if they do, this will happen:
1.SCO reveals code
2.IBM, red hat et al remove or re-write the code and give "fixes" to their customers
3.IBM, red hat et al can then say "yes we were using your code but we stopped as soon as we found out about it" which means that SCO cant do things like filing an injunction that says "if you use our code, you have to pay us mega $$$"
and 4.it becomes a LOT harder for SCO to sue individuals and corperations that are using AIX/Linux/etc (because they will have applied the "fixes" from IBM, red hat et al and therefore its up to SCO to show that they were previously using SCO IP which is harder to do than showing that the users are currently using SCO ip.
Personally, I think IBM should argue that unless SCO shows it the code, there is no way that it can comply with a "dont use our code" injunction.
Telstra:
1.keeps increasing telephone charges (line rental in particular keeps going up and up).
2.has expensive costs for getting phone line hooked up in the first place.
3.owns all the local phone system and most of the national phone network.
4.owns a large amount of the national data networks.
and 5.rips off ADSL customers (both its own and its competitors)
The basic problem is that if you want to have ADSL connected (no matter which ISP) you need to pay a large connection fee, a big chunk of which goes to telstra.
And, you also need to pay a large monthly fee, a large bit of which goes to telstra for line-rental and crap.
Basicly, telstra is a monopoly and like many monopolies, it abuses that power. And our government doesnt give a stuff.
Another thing to remember is that ever since the first geek set-up the first BBS all those years ago, telcos have tried to stop the growth of online communications.
Well here in perth they dont have sunday trading either.
Thank god the government here sees some sense and is looking at changing that.
That they dont define what constitutes a "communications device" accuratly enough. This leaves a big loophole for the telcos, cable companies etc to exploit.
For example, is the modem on my desk the "origin/destination of the communications"?
Is it the port/motherboard/other hardware in the computer? Is it the drivers, network dll files & TCP/IP stack? Is it the internet clients (like Mozilla or Trillian for example)?
1.make a special BIOS that will load an appropriate boot-loader or kernel somehow (something like that XBOX linux bios). Then sell all mod chips with this BIOS pre-loaded. If it detects that the disk in the drive is a bootable kernel or etc it will boot from there else it will boot from the XBOX hard disk. This can be used as-is for XBOX linux. But for those that want a BIOS to play "unsigned xbox software" (such as import titles or some of the xbox emulators floating around), what there would be is a small program that gets put onto a disk & fed into the XBOX which boots & runs it. This program would copy another bootable program to the XBOX HD. The program on the XBOX HD would basicly contain the equivilant of an existing mod BIOS. So, if someone wants to play unsigned crap (such as imports or emulators), they can:
buy this mod chip (which doesnt have any M$ code on it nor does it allow the playing of XBOX games, signed or unsigned, therefore M$ has a lot less chance of sucess if they try to sue)
then either A.re-flash it with some pirate bios from the net (the person selling the chips in the first place would only offer them with this bios)
or B.grab the program that installs the "boot-loader" onto the XBOX hard disk. That "boot-loader" would then substitute for the real XBOX bios & load the appropriate XBE file or whatever.
That way, M$ has less avenues to sue the mod-chip sellers. The person making & distributing the "boot-loader" can do so anonymously or something so that they cant be caught by M$.
not to mention Borland Delphi. Delphi was origonally a codename before it became the final product name
Windows CE source code is useless.
Wake me up when M$ releases the code to something usefull like XP or IE or OE or IIS...