Which gives you at least an hour every year where you have no idea what time it is - because the clock goes back.
Unless you live in Arizona, which does not follow DST. Hummmm.. If it wasn't for our screwed up state goverment, they could use that as a minor sales point for a server farm...:)
I've kept trying to tell my own kids that out of all the classes I took in HS, typing has helped me the most. Sure math and english were important, don't get me wrong, but the typing helped the most.
In order for prior art to cover this, either one reference, showing that this was known before the patentee's invention, has to anticipate every one of the limitations in the claim; or, it must have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine multiple references which, when put together, cover every limitation in the claim.
Can anyone tell me what the differences are between claims 1 and 16? Outside a rewording??? This patent describes a point and click filesystem interface. It provides a visual snapshot of the files, links applications to files based apon being able to manupulate them, and opens the application when that file is selected.
Claim 2/3 looks like screen capture to me.
Claim 4 is the loading of the application linkage with the icon into memory.
Claim 5/6 looks like focus follows mouse cursor.
Claim 7/8/9 is opening application when the icon is selected by unknown method, keyboard or mouse.
Claim 10 allows multiple invocations of the same application.
Claim 11 looks like autosave.
Claim 12 looks like it's trying to cover the bases by mentioning paths and handles for each file. MacOS anybody?
Claim 13 again looks like base covering by covering automatic printing instead of application invocation when selected.
Cliam 14 is copying the file instead of invocation of an application.
Claim 15 is bogus (like the rest). Instead of creating an icon of a "real" file, it a template file instead.
Claim 16 is claim 1 reworded as far as I can tell.
Claim 17 is claim 16's version of claim 4.
The weird part of this patent is the requirement that an application be manuplating the files in question when the snapshot is made. Most likely a restriction required by the examiner.
Except for some problems with boxing/unboxing(as in being a pain in the ass), I've not really ran into any problems using C++/CLI as a langauge on any of my projects. And unless your using the/clr:safe flag, linking with "OLD" C++ should not be problem, every thing else being equal.
And yes, while.NET can be slow, inconsistent and otherwise a piece of s**t, for somethings it's all there is, atleast without rewriting/creating alot of code.
It is NOT the summary that matters, but the claims. Claim 10 reads consisting of Ada, C, C++, C#, COBOL, ColdFusion, Common Lisp, Delphi, Fortran, Java, Object Pascal, SmallTalk, Visual Basic, and Visual Basic.NET, as do claims 11, 12, 16, 17 and 18. None of the claims read "langauges include".
They admit that someone has produced a S2 to javascript complier, but then try to weasel out saying In any event, this approach has various limitations, namely, it is only a "proof of concept" and has not been developed to a stage that could be considered useful, and it only compiles from S2 to core JavaScript. The key feature that would make this useful, i.e., client-side JavaScript, is not present. The developer stated: "This would need some additional . . . hooks into the javascript event model before starting to be useful." A compiler that outputs to core JavaScript, though valuable as an academic exercise, lacks commercial usefulness as the code must then run in an isolated system. The ability to output to client-side (or server-side) JavaScript, which allows it to interact with input and output mechanisms, is the key to making it a commercially viable product.; This is quoated from the application.
To me it looks like a slam dunk denial of application. Just because something is not "commercially viable" does not preclude the prior art. The S2 author plainly stated that it would require more work to be useful, i.e. hooks into the javascript event model.
Another booboo, All current server-side technologies are based on scripting languages. Does this mean that my cc processing application written in C++ does not exist?
"Specifically, the claims describe a system that connects two parties where the receiving party does not need to have a computer or an Internet connection, but the call is routed in part through the Internet or any other 'public computer network'. The calls must also be 'full duplex', meaning that both parties can listen and talk at the same time, like in an ordinary phone call." How about cell phones? Full duplex and routed over a cellular network? Or Internet to fax service?
A companies cell network would not be a "Public network" and as far as I know, ATM networks do not use Internet Protocols nativly. Were there any Internet to fax services prior to September 1995?
What I want to know, is how an application filed in 1995 and not modified (as far as I can tell), can mention prior art/patents from 1998? Where is the modification history?
I don't know if sci-fi writings would be prior art.. (it has also been a few years since I've read it)
To a limited degree. The purpose of prior art is to show that the "CONCEPT" of an idea existed prior to the pantent. If I write about a process or product first, it is hard for someone else to claim the invention of it.
As an example, Heinlien's Waldo was the first mention of waterbeds (or the concept thereof), and so is prior art for any patent on them.
Also, prior art does NOT have contain EVERY concept of the patent claims, it just helps. If you can prove that it is an obvious step from the prior art to the patented idea/process, then you can get the patent rejected.
Also remember that AT&T released most of Unix into the public domain by repeatedly publishing the source code to Universities without copyright attributions.
Copyright is automatic. Something can be given to the Public Domain only by saying it is; failure to print a copyright notice does not do it. Also, copyright does NOT have to be defended, whereas trademarks do.
we should charge any child who has seen him/herself naked with possesion of kiddie porn.
That reminds of this case where a 15 year old girl was charged with kiddie porn of HERSELF... I linked the BLOG because the original news story has gone away...:(
I have changed out more motherboards with Windows XP then I care to count, most times Windows XP chugged along, but a few times it asked me to call up to revalidate it, it was a painless process, I just tell the lady (truthfully in my cases) that I changed out the motherboard because the old one was fried, then the lady read up the new key, and the user was up and running.
Well, I'm willing to bet that he had a OEM copy, locked to the BIOS...
The copy of SPARC-based Solaris 8 that I have handy mentions that parts of code may contain code derived from BSD, but that's about it.
Unless I'm mistaken, Solaris 8 contains at minimum the csh/tcsh, which is BSD licensed. While the advertising clause was removed in 1999, you still have to give credit to author in the docs. Unless ( AT&T | Novell | SCO | Sun ) had recreated all UCB/BSD code (userland or kernel), they would have to still have the credits in the manual.
In Australia, you can pose for pornography at age 16, with parental consent.
More fuel for the fire. In some states (Texas and I belive Arizona, come to mind), a 17 year old can dance in a bars (both topless and full nude). So what they are saying is that you can look at a live 17 year old all you want, but a single photo of her topless will get busted. Hummmm.
Reminds me of the casino laws, in person (certain locations only) it's OK, but take it to the internet and you get in trouble...
A number of technical publishers have been releasing programming books as PDFs lately.QLI/RPGRealms is doing this for T20, their D20 based Traveller system. Almost all of their publications are available in PDF format, at a discount. I've got the hardcover core book, but EVERYTHING else is PDF, including Gateway to Destiny(Original Traveller Universe, Gateway Sector). If you already know how the D20 system works, download T20 lite and have fun... I just wish I could get the Classic Traveller in PDF. Between my LBB(Little Black Books) and double page reprints from Marc Miller, it's a pain to carry them around (The LBB boxes fell apart a LONG time ago..:)). One of these days...
This part of the thread reminds me of the movie Gattaca (1997). In a nutshell, DNA testing was done at birth, and if you had problems, you were a second class citizen. The entire world revolved around DNA testing to make sure the "problem people" never got an even break.
The last one we had stopped responding after some time up (probably due to some buffer overflowing)
By chance was that a Netgear WG602(V1) Wireless? I've got that problem with mine, and there are no updates avaliable...:( After a time (depends on traffic only, not time), it will stop responding on the ethernet interface, only option is to reboot it.
Well, running a SELECT COUNT(*) on the threads JOIN topics will BE BALLS slow on PostgreSQL.
Have you tried it with 8.1? If you've got your indexes setup properly, it's ALOT faster than it was (used to require a seq scan, but now uses an index if available). In general, 8.1 is alot faster than prior versions, especially if you take advantage of the the bells and whistles (e.g. prepared transactions, tablespaces and auto-vacuum).
I'm sorry, Python reminds me too much of old basics and lisp...shudder. If I really need threading that bad (I've never had a problem with Perl's OOP, you just have to remember that it's not enforced with any strength) I'll just use C++ and kill two birds with one stone.
As for the Perl, what's wrong with the following? sub bar { my $arg1 = shift; my $arg2 = shift || 'default'; # XXX # }
You still get a default value for $arg2 if no value is passed. I've never liked list processing for sub args. My perference is to just pass a hash ref and use named args for anything but simple subs.
Great. Now how about finishing porting FreeBSD to PowerPC
Have you taken a look at the updated PPC Project Page? It has came a long way from where it was even 6 months ago. Give it a couple more months I would say and it'll be a first class port...
I just wish it supported 7300 series machines and not just New World stuff...:(
You: Before I go any farther, I have to see your driver's license or a birth certificate, ma'am.
Both of which are WORTHLESS! A birth certificate has no picture (maybe she has an older sister), and a DL can be forged (Go around to 5 popular night clubs in your area, ask the doorman how many GOOD fake IDs they see. Unless your a pro, you may not spot a good one, and even pros get fooled...)
Note that all convicted felons -- not just sex offenders -- have lost their right to vote.
Note: Most states restore voting rights after compleation of sentence. Some are automatic (e.g. Texas) and in others you must request it (e.g. Florida). VERY few states take it away permently (e.g. Virgina). Others have funky loop holes (e.g. Arizona, 2nd felony no restoration).
It's the other rights that are stripped forever in most cases (firearms, jury duty, public office).
Sorry but the percentages speak loud and clear - unlike other criminal activity a sex offender is FAR more likley to repeat the offense. That's exactly why there is a registry
Can you backup your statements with valid studies? The majority of the studies I've seen point the other way, especially if the offenders in question received any type of treatment. Here is a link from the US Justice Department with data showing about a 16% average reoffense rate for sex crimes (13% recidivism rate for molestors and 19% for rapists for new sex offenses) (Look in FAQ). Considering the average rate for non-sex offender recidivism is above 30%, welll....
The real reason for the registry is to make people feel good and think that congress is doing something, nothing more.
n this world, we apparently are more concerned about the comfort and freedom of past sex offenders than the near-certainty that they will offend again, if given the opportunity. (One 30-year Canadian follow-up study showed a recidivism rate of 77% for criminals convicted of sexual offences.)
Can you give a reference for this study? Most of the studies I've seen report the reverse, sex offenders are less likely to reoffend than other criminals. I think my psych professor would like it.
Slashdot Mirror
Which gives you at least an hour every year where you have no idea what time it is - because the clock goes back.
Unless you live in Arizona, which does not follow DST. Hummmm.. If it wasn't for our screwed up state goverment, they could use that as a minor sales point for a server farm... :)
bovinewasteproduct
I've kept trying to tell my own kids that out of all the classes I took in HS, typing has helped me the most.
Sure math and english were important, don't get me wrong, but the typing helped the most.
BWP
In order for prior art to cover this, either one reference, showing that this was known before the patentee's invention, has to anticipate every one of the limitations in the claim; or, it must have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine multiple references which, when put together, cover every limitation in the claim.
INAL goes with saying.
Please see patent office http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=7346850.PN.&OS=PN/7346850&RS=PN/7346850version for better information.
Can anyone tell me what the differences are between claims 1 and 16? Outside a rewording??? This patent describes a point and click filesystem interface. It provides a visual snapshot of the files, links applications to files based apon being able to manupulate them, and opens the application when that file is selected.
Claim 2/3 looks like screen capture to me.
Claim 4 is the loading of the application linkage with the icon into memory.
Claim 5/6 looks like focus follows mouse cursor.
Claim 7/8/9 is opening application when the icon is selected by unknown method, keyboard or mouse.
Claim 10 allows multiple invocations of the same application.
Claim 11 looks like autosave.
Claim 12 looks like it's trying to cover the bases by mentioning paths and handles for each file. MacOS anybody?
Claim 13 again looks like base covering by covering automatic printing instead of application invocation when selected.
Cliam 14 is copying the file instead of invocation of an application.
Claim 15 is bogus (like the rest). Instead of creating an icon of a "real" file, it a template file instead.
Claim 16 is claim 1 reworded as far as I can tell.
Claim 17 is claim 16's version of claim 4.
The weird part of this patent is the requirement that an application be manuplating the files in question when the snapshot is made. Most likely a restriction required by the examiner.
Now for a REAL laugh, they filed an another http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=09097283&OS=09097283&RS=09097283application for a NEW patent as a continuation-in-part of the granted application. I can't belive they spent the money. And BTW, it almost looks like the filed lawsuit assumes that THIS application has granted instead of 09/878,009 from which patent 7,346,850 was granted.
And remember that it is the language of the claims that matter, NOT the abstract or desciption.
BWP
MS did do a lot of work (pretty poor IMHO though) with C++/CLI to get some interop going between C++ and C#/VB.
I think Herb Sutter did a pretty good job of explaining why they designed C++/CLI the way they did in this article on his website http://www.gotw.ca/publications/C++CLIRationale.pdf.
Except for some problems with boxing/unboxing(as in being a pain in the ass), I've not really ran into any problems using C++/CLI as a langauge on any of my projects. And unless your using the /clr:safe flag, linking with "OLD" C++ should not be problem, every thing else being equal.
And yes, while .NET can be slow, inconsistent and otherwise a piece of s**t, for somethings it's all there is, atleast without rewriting/creating alot of code.
BWP
What's even worse about selling oxygen-free mono-isotopic silver cables is that fact that silver oxide is a better conductor than pure silver...
BWP
Follow up to my prior post...
There was a perl PIL compiler that was commited in July of 2005.
From the README.
PIL2JS - PIL to JavaScript compiler
=head1 DESCRIPTION
C is a Perl 5 program which takes PIL as input (as given by C) and outputs JavaScript.
Looks like the same thing to me. Again, not listed in prior art.
BWP
How do you know? The summary states that
It is NOT the summary that matters, but the claims. Claim 10 reads consisting of Ada, C, C++, C#, COBOL, ColdFusion, Common Lisp, Delphi, Fortran, Java, Object Pascal, SmallTalk, Visual Basic, and Visual Basic.NET, as do claims 11, 12, 16, 17 and 18. None of the claims read "langauges include".
They admit that someone has produced a S2 to javascript complier, but then try to weasel out saying
In any event, this approach has various limitations, namely, it is only a "proof of concept" and has not been developed to a stage that could be considered useful, and it only compiles from S2 to core JavaScript. The key feature that would make this useful, i.e., client-side JavaScript, is not present. The developer stated: "This would need some additional . . . hooks into the javascript event model before starting to be useful." A compiler that outputs to core JavaScript, though valuable as an academic exercise, lacks commercial usefulness as the code must then run in an isolated system. The ability to output to client-side (or server-side) JavaScript, which allows it to interact with input and output mechanisms, is the key to making it a commercially viable product.; This is quoated from the application.
To me it looks like a slam dunk denial of application. Just because something is not "commercially viable" does not preclude the prior art. The S2 author plainly stated that it would require more work to be useful, i.e. hooks into the javascript event model.
Another booboo, All current server-side technologies are based on scripting languages. Does this mean that my cc processing application written in C++ does not exist?
BWP
"Specifically, the claims describe a system that connects two parties where the receiving party does not need to have a computer or an Internet connection, but the call is routed in part through the Internet or any other 'public computer network'. The calls must also be 'full duplex', meaning that both parties can listen and talk at the same time, like in an ordinary phone call." How about cell phones? Full duplex and routed over a cellular network? Or Internet to fax service?
A companies cell network would not be a "Public network" and as far as I know, ATM networks do not use Internet Protocols nativly. Were there any Internet to fax services prior to September 1995?
What I want to know, is how an application filed in 1995 and not modified (as far as I can tell), can mention prior art/patents from 1998? Where is the modification history?
BWP
I don't know if sci-fi writings would be prior art.. (it has also been a few years since I've read it)
To a limited degree. The purpose of prior art is to show that the "CONCEPT" of an idea existed prior to the pantent. If I write about a process or product first, it is hard for someone else to claim the invention of it.
As an example, Heinlien's Waldo was the first mention of waterbeds (or the concept thereof), and so is prior art for any patent on them.
Also, prior art does NOT have contain EVERY concept of the patent claims, it just helps. If you can prove that it is an obvious step from the prior art to the patented idea/process, then you can get the patent rejected.
BWP
Also remember that AT&T released most of Unix into the public domain by repeatedly publishing the source code to Universities without copyright attributions.
Copyright is automatic. Something can be given to the Public Domain only by saying it is; failure to print a copyright notice does not do it.
Also, copyright does NOT have to be defended, whereas trademarks do.
BWP
we should charge any child who has seen him/herself naked with possesion of kiddie porn.
That reminds of this case where a 15 year old girl was charged with kiddie porn of HERSELF...
I linked the BLOG because the original news story has gone away...:(
BWP
I have changed out more motherboards with Windows XP then I care to count, most times Windows XP chugged along, but a few times it asked me to call up to revalidate it, it was a painless process, I just tell the lady (truthfully in my cases) that I changed out the motherboard because the old one was fried, then the lady read up the new key, and the user was up and running.
Well, I'm willing to bet that he had a OEM copy, locked to the BIOS...
BWP
The copy of SPARC-based Solaris 8 that I have handy mentions that parts of code may contain code derived from BSD, but that's about it.
Unless I'm mistaken, Solaris 8 contains at minimum the csh/tcsh, which is BSD licensed. While the advertising clause was removed in 1999, you still have to give credit to author in the docs. Unless ( AT&T | Novell | SCO | Sun ) had recreated all UCB/BSD code (userland or kernel), they would have to still have the credits in the manual.
BWP
In Australia, you can pose for pornography at age 16, with parental consent.
More fuel for the fire. In some states (Texas and I belive Arizona, come to mind), a 17 year old can dance in a bars (both topless and full nude). So what they are saying is that you can look at a live 17 year old all you want, but a single photo of her topless will get busted. Hummmm.
Reminds me of the casino laws, in person (certain locations only) it's OK, but take it to the internet and you get in trouble...
BWP
A number of technical publishers have been releasing programming books as PDFs lately. QLI/RPGRealms is doing this for T20, their D20 based Traveller system. Almost all of their publications are available in PDF format, at a discount. I've got the hardcover core book, but EVERYTHING else is PDF, including Gateway to Destiny(Original Traveller Universe, Gateway Sector). If you already know how the D20 system works, download T20 lite and have fun... I just wish I could get the Classic Traveller in PDF. Between my LBB(Little Black Books) and double page reprints from Marc Miller, it's a pain to carry them around (The LBB boxes fell apart a LONG time ago..:)). One of these days...
BWP
This part of the thread reminds me of the movie Gattaca (1997). In a nutshell, DNA testing was done at birth, and if you had problems, you
were a second class citizen. The entire world revolved around DNA testing to make sure the "problem people" never got an even break.
BWP
The last one we had stopped responding after some time up (probably due to some buffer overflowing)
By chance was that a Netgear WG602(V1) Wireless? I've got that problem with mine, and there are no updates avaliable...:(
After a time (depends on traffic only, not time), it will stop responding on the ethernet interface, only option is to reboot it.
BWP
Well, running a SELECT COUNT(*) on the threads JOIN topics will BE BALLS slow on PostgreSQL.
Have you tried it with 8.1? If you've got your indexes setup properly, it's ALOT faster than it was (used to require a seq scan, but now uses an index if available). In general, 8.1 is alot faster than prior versions, especially if you take advantage of the the bells and whistles (e.g. prepared transactions, tablespaces and auto-vacuum).
BWP
I'm sorry, Python reminds me too much of old basics and lisp...shudder. If I really need threading that bad (I've never had a problem with Perl's OOP, you just have to remember that it's not enforced with any strength) I'll just use C++ and kill two birds with one stone.
As for the Perl, what's wrong with the following?
sub bar {
my $arg1 = shift;
my $arg2 = shift || 'default';
# XXX #
}
You still get a default value for $arg2 if no value is passed. I've never liked list processing for sub args. My perference is to just pass a hash ref and use named args for anything but simple subs.
BWP
Great. Now how about finishing porting FreeBSD to PowerPC
Have you taken a look at the updated PPC Project Page? It has came a long way from where it was even 6 months ago. Give it a couple more months I would say and it'll be a first class port...
I just wish it supported 7300 series machines and not just New World stuff...:(
BWP
If you had a 16% chance of getting shot every time you drove down a certain street would you avoid it or not?
If every kid had a 16% chance of being a victim, it would be a totally different story.
When you consider that violent criminals have a much higher rate of recidivism and that there are more of them, my comments stand.
BWP
You: Before I go any farther, I have to see your driver's license or a birth certificate, ma'am.
Both of which are WORTHLESS! A birth certificate has no picture (maybe she has an older sister), and a DL can be forged (Go around to 5 popular night clubs in your area, ask the doorman how many GOOD fake IDs they see. Unless your a pro, you may not spot a good one, and even pros get fooled...)
BWP
Note that all convicted felons -- not just sex offenders -- have lost their right to vote.
Note: Most states restore voting rights after compleation of sentence. Some are automatic (e.g. Texas) and in others you must request it (e.g. Florida). VERY few states take it away permently (e.g. Virgina). Others have funky loop holes (e.g. Arizona, 2nd felony no restoration).
It's the other rights that are stripped forever in most cases (firearms, jury duty, public office).
BWP
Sorry but the percentages speak loud and clear - unlike other criminal activity a sex offender is FAR more likley to repeat the offense. That's exactly why there is a registry
Can you backup your statements with valid studies? The majority of the studies I've seen point the other way, especially if the offenders in question received any type of treatment. Here is a link from the US Justice Department with data showing about a 16% average reoffense rate for sex crimes (13% recidivism rate for molestors and 19% for rapists for new sex offenses) (Look in FAQ). Considering the average rate for non-sex offender recidivism is above 30%, welll....
The real reason for the registry is to make people feel good and think that congress is doing something, nothing more.
BWP
n this world, we apparently are more concerned about the comfort and freedom of past sex offenders than the near-certainty that they will offend again, if given the opportunity. (One 30-year Canadian follow-up study showed a recidivism rate of 77% for criminals convicted of sexual offences.)
Can you give a reference for this study? Most of the studies I've seen report the reverse, sex offenders are less likely to reoffend than other criminals. I think my psych professor would like it.
BWP