Whitney continued to invent. As an example, a few years later he signed a contract with the government for creating rifles using standardized parts. He then went and squandered that money trying to sue those who copied the gin and lost in the Southern courts, which is why he died penniless. Yes, those who sue, rather than invent go broke - big surprise.
Swan's lamp had a very short lifespan because his carbon filament was thick, requiring high-current and, thus, burned out quickly. Edison came across the idea of a thin filament and had a very long-lived bulb. Swan may have passed current through a carbon element causing it to glow, but Edison's refinement made it practical and was as much (or more) entitled to a patent as Swan's original device. Certainly, you do not defend the notion of someone like Swan free-riding on Edison's completed, practical invention, do you? In addition, Swan also continued to invent following this episode. He made contributions to photography following his "invention" of the electric light.
Gray didn't file a patent for voice communication. Bell did. Gray didn't have a working model. Bell did. Bell won - end of story. Gray also continued inventing after the telephone saga, being considered the inventor of the music synthesizer.
So, you're batting three-for-three here. None of the inventors you mentioned stopped inventing following their patent issues. Some of them might not have gotten as rich as they might have, but none of them stopped inventing. If anything, it seemed to drive them into continued invention, rather than resting on their laurels (or piles of money).
Call me when you get medical researchers to sign up for something like this. CS is a small backwater that the general public (and other fields, frankly) will not notice.
It's a good thing, but not necessarily earth-shattering. It would be nice to see articles out from behind the IEEE and ACM paywalls, though.
This sounds like one of those brilliant ideas on paper, but one that will prove infinitely harder in reality.
Remember that "R" in DARPA's name? It doesn't have to work. It just has to be something interesting from which one could learn something new. And I could see a whole lot of useful/interesting stuff coming out of even trying to do something like this.
In addition to the United States Geological Survey, there is a California Geological Survey, Mississippi Geological Survey, etc.
And, if you had worked at one of those places (like I did for a few years, for the Illinois State GS), you'd know that a quite a bit (actually, the majority) of their funding comes via contracts from the USGS. And, if you think the situation has gotten less like that in the twenty-five years since I was there, think again. With the amount of funding states are able fund dropping, those federal contracts are what are keeping these places going. No USGS, no contracts, no state geological surveys.
And as bad as Shit My Dad Says was, it wasn't the Shat's fault. The producers watered that whole concept way down to the point where anybody in that role would have failed.
True enough. They took a character that might have been interesting and tossed in enough bad sitcom stuff that it (oddly enough) became a bad sitcom.
I don't blame him for getting paid, it would have been either him or somebody else taking money to participate in that shit series. Old men are also practical, and life isn't free.
What's the difference between an "actor" and a "working actor"? Working. The good ones never forget that. Once you fall off the train, it's hard to climb back on. So the best ones keep riding - even if the train looks a bit rickety.
I have both accounts. Right now Google+ looks mainly like a Facebook clone. There's little reason to shift to it other than because it's not Facebook (which still isn't a good enough reason).
The only advantage Google+ could possibly have over Facebook is integration with the rest of the Google application infrastructure. But that's been slow to non-existent in coming. It would really be nice in Google Reader, for example, to push a button, fill out a brief message and have it posted to your stream. Same with making a notification for new blog entries in Google Sites, new items on Google Calendar, or pushing an external link to a Google Docs item. But you can't do any of that. Instead, you need to leave your current context and dick about with copying links, cutting/pasting text, etc.
Google+ could have been the main point of coordination for the rest of the Googleverse, but it blew it by hewing to the current internal product silos. If it's just a Facebook clone, who needs it?
Agreed... But simply calling them shrill, ill-informed, ignorant, and politically and economically counterproductive still seems a bit too civil. Is it OK if we just call them assholes?
The only time I saw him bow to shareholder pressure was the first time he resigned. And the second time around, he showed you didn't have to if you stuck to your values. I hope there are others out there like him.
Innovation comes from the middle class. The underclasses are too busy trying to survive to innovate. The rich have no need to (other than using this innovation as an investment vehicle). As the middle class shrinks, the number of people innovating shrinks, as does the quanity of innovation in toto.
Want more innovation? Reinvigorate the middle class rather than turning them into the underclass.
Most people don't need a completely open PC. Unfortunately, the market had wedged itself into a place where, up to a couple years ago, you could get nothing that had necessary capabilities other than a general-purpose machine which had security which was obtuse, difficult to use, and was still as holey as swiss cheese. Most people can do quite well with just a locked down system in a walled-garden. Maybe you won't call it a PC, but you better call it what it is - the interface device of the future.
Somehow I don't think that your average corporate intranet application needs anywhere near this much effort...
Probably not and, if it's used only within the organization, the software probably will never need it. On the other hand, if you're selling bits to people outside your own organization, you are impacting their lives when it fails. Yes, there are some apps that don't (games, etc.), but if you're dealing with critical or widely-used infrastructure or private data, you damn well should be liable. Unless, of course, you're a hack who doesn't stand behind his work.
How does the number and functionality of your Chrome Add-ons compare to Firefox add-ons?
Remember that most add-ons are (a) redundant or (b) too esoteric to be used by most people (Just what I need! Another kind of stock ticker! Ooooh! And here's a nuclear waste countdown clock!). As such, for what most people need, Chrome and Firefox are basically equivalent. They weren't when Chrome started, but they are now. To seal the deal, Chrome has a more appealing download page for their add-ons, so I tend to search longer and end up using more add-ons in Chrome than I ever did in Firefox.
Chrome seems simpler to use than Firefox ever was. Maybe, eventually, an open source project will get usability right, but I'm not holding my breath. Most open source guys worry about simple stuff like programming - usability is hard. Chrome - the experience is just better.
Although I agree that the GP was out of line, I must take exception with your statement:
These people risk their lives so you can spew this crap, to protect you and your rights that you don't even deserve to have.
Perhaps you don't realize this, but the rights mentioned by you are accorded to everyone simply because they are human - deserving them or not does not come into the picture. The idea that some people deserve rights, while others don't, is often a key ingredient to (apparent) overreactions like this article is about. You might want to rethink these words, as they seem to have been typed in anger, rather than in reflection.
I can't see anyone selling malpractice/liability insurance for this scheme at a reasonable price - there's just too much to miss when using telepresence rather than being there. It will just take one lawsuit because some teledoc misses something that should have been caught had he/she been there in person and the whole idea of telemedicine will go out the window.
Nice service youse got there... It'd be a shame if anything bad should happen to it. It's a dangerous place, Detroit. Now, if I were you, and I'm just sayin' mind you, that a nice contribution to the folks that helped bail youse guys out might go a long way towards protectin' your service there.
And, don't think I'm showing bias or false equivalency because I'm picking on the Democrat here - the Republicans would do the same thing, but end up with twice as big a payoff, because they're "better" politicians.
In the final analysis, I hate being so cynical, but these bastards (even the ones most aligned with my political views) won't police themselves, so what choice do I have? (Well, other than voting, which I do, but...)
First, it would be increasing the "size" of government, even if it lowered its "cost" and the R's still wouldn't let that happen. Second, they tend to be liberals...
Inflation may change all that very soon. Bernanke is dumping dollars on the market like there's no tomorrow...
Then why aren't either short or long term interest rates soaring? If there were even a sniff of inflation in the air, the interest rates should be going through the roof. Sadly, models and facts have this odd way of contradicting your morality-based economics.
No, no!!! Not Portland! It's always rainy here and there are all of those smelly hippies and hipsters and... well, you saw Portlandia, didn't you? It's just like that. And there are cougars (the feline kind) roaming in the streets (no more cars to run them over now that we have so many bicycles) so you're not safe at all. Stay down there in beatuiful, sunny California. I'd be down there with you, instead of this hell hole, but we don't make enough money up here for us to move there.
Slashdot Mirror
Whitney continued to invent. As an example, a few years later he signed a contract with the government for creating rifles using standardized parts. He then went and squandered that money trying to sue those who copied the gin and lost in the Southern courts, which is why he died penniless. Yes, those who sue, rather than invent go broke - big surprise.
Swan's lamp had a very short lifespan because his carbon filament was thick, requiring high-current and, thus, burned out quickly. Edison came across the idea of a thin filament and had a very long-lived bulb. Swan may have passed current through a carbon element causing it to glow, but Edison's refinement made it practical and was as much (or more) entitled to a patent as Swan's original device. Certainly, you do not defend the notion of someone like Swan free-riding on Edison's completed, practical invention, do you? In addition, Swan also continued to invent following this episode. He made contributions to photography following his "invention" of the electric light.
Gray didn't file a patent for voice communication. Bell did. Gray didn't have a working model. Bell did. Bell won - end of story. Gray also continued inventing after the telephone saga, being considered the inventor of the music synthesizer.
So, you're batting three-for-three here. None of the inventors you mentioned stopped inventing following their patent issues. Some of them might not have gotten as rich as they might have, but none of them stopped inventing. If anything, it seemed to drive them into continued invention, rather than resting on their laurels (or piles of money).
Can we leave out the links to Texas? It will make things a lot easier when they go crazy and secede.
[C]ould this be the start of something big?
Call me when you get medical researchers to sign up for something like this. CS is a small backwater that the general public (and other fields, frankly) will not notice.
It's a good thing, but not necessarily earth-shattering. It would be nice to see articles out from behind the IEEE and ACM paywalls, though.
This sounds like one of those brilliant ideas on paper, but one that will prove infinitely harder in reality.
Remember that "R" in DARPA's name? It doesn't have to work. It just has to be something interesting from which one could learn something new. And I could see a whole lot of useful/interesting stuff coming out of even trying to do something like this.
In addition to the United States Geological Survey, there is a California Geological Survey, Mississippi Geological Survey, etc.
And, if you had worked at one of those places (like I did for a few years, for the Illinois State GS), you'd know that a quite a bit (actually, the majority) of their funding comes via contracts from the USGS. And, if you think the situation has gotten less like that in the twenty-five years since I was there, think again. With the amount of funding states are able fund dropping, those federal contracts are what are keeping these places going. No USGS, no contracts, no state geological surveys.
And as bad as Shit My Dad Says was, it wasn't the Shat's fault. The producers watered that whole concept way down to the point where anybody in that role would have failed.
True enough. They took a character that might have been interesting and tossed in enough bad sitcom stuff that it (oddly enough) became a bad sitcom.
I don't blame him for getting paid, it would have been either him or somebody else taking money to participate in that shit series. Old men are also practical, and life isn't free.
What's the difference between an "actor" and a "working actor"? Working. The good ones never forget that. Once you fall off the train, it's hard to climb back on. So the best ones keep riding - even if the train looks a bit rickety.
I have both accounts. Right now Google+ looks mainly like a Facebook clone. There's little reason to shift to it other than because it's not Facebook (which still isn't a good enough reason).
The only advantage Google+ could possibly have over Facebook is integration with the rest of the Google application infrastructure. But that's been slow to non-existent in coming. It would really be nice in Google Reader, for example, to push a button, fill out a brief message and have it posted to your stream. Same with making a notification for new blog entries in Google Sites, new items on Google Calendar, or pushing an external link to a Google Docs item. But you can't do any of that. Instead, you need to leave your current context and dick about with copying links, cutting/pasting text, etc.
Google+ could have been the main point of coordination for the rest of the Googleverse, but it blew it by hewing to the current internal product silos. If it's just a Facebook clone, who needs it?
Agreed... But simply calling them shrill, ill-informed, ignorant, and politically and economically counterproductive still seems a bit too civil. Is it OK if we just call them assholes?
Bring back Jon Katz!!!!
Amen.
The only time I saw him bow to shareholder pressure was the first time he resigned. And the second time around, he showed you didn't have to if you stuck to your values. I hope there are others out there like him.
Innovation comes from the middle class. The underclasses are too busy trying to survive to innovate. The rich have no need to (other than using this innovation as an investment vehicle). As the middle class shrinks, the number of people innovating shrinks, as does the quanity of innovation in toto.
Want more innovation? Reinvigorate the middle class rather than turning them into the underclass.
1. High explosives.
2. Rocket into the sun.
3. Dissolve in acid bath.
4. Laser beam (preferabley on shark's head)
5. Poison gas.
Oh, wait... those last two were from my "Evil villain list of how to get rid of nosy spies". Oh, well... same thing.
Most people don't need a completely open PC. Unfortunately, the market had wedged itself into a place where, up to a couple years ago, you could get nothing that had necessary capabilities other than a general-purpose machine which had security which was obtuse, difficult to use, and was still as holey as swiss cheese. Most people can do quite well with just a locked down system in a walled-garden. Maybe you won't call it a PC, but you better call it what it is - the interface device of the future.
Somehow I don't think that your average corporate intranet application needs anywhere near this much effort...
Probably not and, if it's used only within the organization, the software probably will never need it. On the other hand, if you're selling bits to people outside your own organization, you are impacting their lives when it fails. Yes, there are some apps that don't (games, etc.), but if you're dealing with critical or widely-used infrastructure or private data, you damn well should be liable. Unless, of course, you're a hack who doesn't stand behind his work.
How does the number and functionality of your Chrome Add-ons compare to Firefox add-ons?
Remember that most add-ons are (a) redundant or (b) too esoteric to be used by most people (Just what I need! Another kind of stock ticker! Ooooh! And here's a nuclear waste countdown clock!). As such, for what most people need, Chrome and Firefox are basically equivalent. They weren't when Chrome started, but they are now. To seal the deal, Chrome has a more appealing download page for their add-ons, so I tend to search longer and end up using more add-ons in Chrome than I ever did in Firefox.
Chrome seems simpler to use than Firefox ever was. Maybe, eventually, an open source project will get usability right, but I'm not holding my breath. Most open source guys worry about simple stuff like programming - usability is hard. Chrome - the experience is just better.
Although I agree that the GP was out of line, I must take exception with your statement:
These people risk their lives so you can spew this crap, to protect you and your rights that you don't even deserve to have.
Perhaps you don't realize this, but the rights mentioned by you are accorded to everyone simply because they are human - deserving them or not does not come into the picture. The idea that some people deserve rights, while others don't, is often a key ingredient to (apparent) overreactions like this article is about. You might want to rethink these words, as they seem to have been typed in anger, rather than in reflection.
I can't see anyone selling malpractice/liability insurance for this scheme at a reasonable price - there's just too much to miss when using telepresence rather than being there. It will just take one lawsuit because some teledoc misses something that should have been caught had he/she been there in person and the whole idea of telemedicine will go out the window.
Nice service youse got there... It'd be a shame if anything bad should happen to it. It's a dangerous place, Detroit. Now, if I were you, and I'm just sayin' mind you, that a nice contribution to the folks that helped bail youse guys out might go a long way towards protectin' your service there.
And, don't think I'm showing bias or false equivalency because I'm picking on the Democrat here - the Republicans would do the same thing, but end up with twice as big a payoff, because they're "better" politicians.
In the final analysis, I hate being so cynical, but these bastards (even the ones most aligned with my political views) won't police themselves, so what choice do I have? (Well, other than voting, which I do, but...)
First, it would be increasing the "size" of government, even if it lowered its "cost" and the R's still wouldn't let that happen. Second, they tend to be liberals...
A "deceptive business practice" clause that could cover this kind of thing.
Well, yeah, if there was anyone left to enforce it against. Which there isn't. Because the whole point of Chapter 7 is that tere's nothing left.
Where was this guy when Hitler needed him?
Corporations = Government these days.
Dumbass.
Inflation may change all that very soon. Bernanke is dumping dollars on the market like there's no tomorrow...
Then why aren't either short or long term interest rates soaring? If there were even a sniff of inflation in the air, the interest rates should be going through the roof. Sadly, models and facts have this odd way of contradicting your morality-based economics.
No, no!!! Not Portland! It's always rainy here and there are all of those smelly hippies and hipsters and... well, you saw Portlandia, didn't you? It's just like that. And there are cougars (the feline kind) roaming in the streets (no more cars to run them over now that we have so many bicycles) so you're not safe at all. Stay down there in beatuiful, sunny California. I'd be down there with you, instead of this hell hole, but we don't make enough money up here for us to move there.
That means the animated ads can now suck up all of my CPU, rather than just one core's worth. I can't wait!