Re:Cook more "claimed" Australia than discovered.
on
Venus Transit Finished
·
· Score: 1
Finally we have to thank you Yanks for the actual colonisation of Oz by the Brits. If you hadn't had that little war of independence back a few years ago, the Brits would not have had to find a new location for their crims.
Jeez, just do what we did. All it takes is a few friends in the French navy.
And I would have grown up speaking with a North American accent..
I just know some idiot will latch on to this and use it as an excuse why OSS is bad/evil/wrong.
See? We can tell Adobe to lock down their software to stop counterfeiting, and it happens. But not those OSS people. Having the source means you can change the source. It makes counterfeiting possible, promotes communism, and makes baby Jesus cry.
Unfortunately, it's not the software that's the problem - it's the law thinking it can mandate things like this that's the problem. But you watch - OSS is going to take a beating for this anyhow.
All utility patent applications filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office after November 29, 2000 will be published if an applicant does not expressly request on filing that the application not be published. An applicant may make a request for non-publication if (1) the applicant has not filed the application in any other country that publishes applications; and, (2) the applicant does not intend to file the application in any country that publishes applications.
So, it's a little bit better, but not by a whole lot. You can still hide your applications, and it doesn't take into account things already "in the system."
I still say that serious reform needs to take place. But it's nice to know that the law already sees it, AC.
The National Academy of Sciences is calling for more funding for the patent office where 3,000 examiners handle 350,000 applications a year with an average of 17 to 25 hours to check on the validity of a patent application.
Businesses claim a lack of due diligence at this stage often results in patents being granted that should not see the light of day.
There you have it, the entire problem in a nutshell. Too much work, and not enough people.
And I have a solution.
Public review for patents. Open source meets patent reform.
Here's how the new system might work. Someone applies for a patent, and it gets posted to a website for public review.
That gives the public the ability to search for prior art. If prior art is found, even after the patent is granted...zap. The patent is invalid. And if the prior art is more than...say 5 years old, the idea is now public domain and no longer patentable.
Also, widen the definition of prior art. Best example of that I can think of off the top of my head is Intel patenting a method to detect overclockers. Measure the cpu clock versus an internal clock. Compare. If they differ by more than a small percentage, shut down. In other words, they managed to patent a binary counter. Bogus. Simply using an established widget in a new way shouldn't be patentable. No more Bezos "with a computer" patents.
And no patent should be granted for more than 5 years or so. This is important, otherwise we could wind up in a technological backwater. Small countries (with no extradition treaties with the US) would be the next Silicon Valley. You think you're being outsourced now? Just wait until you can't program at all in the US due to fear of litigation.
I think that it should be possible to have an idea, patent it, and make your million. But not at the expense of the entire tech sector.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to go double click something.;^)
I wonder if the asshat at the patent office realized that he had to double click at least once during the process of filing the stupid patent. Clearly, the people at the patent office are so far out of touch with reality that they can no longer be taken seriously.
So, I propose this for the new patent system (it's un-Slashdot of me, but not only am I bitching about something, I have an idea on how to fix it.)
Public peer review. Open source meets patent reform.
As soon as a patent is applied for, it is placed up on a website for public review. Then, it's up to the public as well as the patent office to try to find any prior art.
If prior art is found, the patent is denied. Period. And if the prior art is over 5 years old, it's considered a public domain idea, and no longer patentable. That'll keep idiots like the lawyersquad at MS from patenting other people's ideas. Like double clicks.
You know the joke about the whole SubGenius thing..."If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?"
Here is a prime example of why we are all SubGenii. We all knew that SCO would tank. We had a golden opportunity to make some serious cash. And you know what? I'll betcha not a single person on all of Slashdot cashed in on these fools. Damn.
It's not often you have a sure thing in a horse race. And I just missed mine. Double damn.
I know how to cook. Somewhat. But when I watch Alton do what he does, it puts "another tool in the toolbox." I learn a new trick, or a reason why, or something that'll make my next attempt better. Hopefully.
It's a lot like watching Bob Vila. He won't make anyone into a DIY guru. You won't be able to build a palace in your backyard just by watching him. But he'll show you a few new tricks, or how to use a tool properly, or something useful that you'll someday use.
Having more tools won't make you an artist, true. But it might make a budding artist more able to express himself.
These days, it's a truth that most spammers have to break other laws to try to get their spam out. It's not like the old days of open relays and a trusting email network. Now, we have worm exploits, stolen identities, account phishing, hacked boxes...the list goes on and on.
We can pat ourselves on the back here, I think. Now that we're as a community becoming aware of the spam problem and doing something about it (like closing down open relays and blocking those who don't), spammers now have to break other laws to get their crap through.
And that makes them targets for prosecution. So, let's all give ourselves a round of applause here. If you closed an open relay, or wiped out a worm, you contributed to this!
At one point, RR in northeast Ohio needed you to do some kinda logon before they'd pass packets for you. They had some Win software that would do a name/password thing.
A tech or friend of a tech there made "rrlinux", a GPL version of the same. Also a version of DHCP that was more RR friendly (RR's DHCP servers were a little flaky early on).
RR tech support web pages had Linux buttons to click that would take you offsite to this guy's personal web page for support.
The cover thing reminded me of a tech support story of mine.
I was doing support for some lawyers. Built them some PCs. One guy calls me after a week or two and says he can't get on the net.
So I arrive and test the PC. Yup. No net.
I do a little fiddling, then eventually take the PC out of the little wooden cubby hole in his desk to fiddle with it. I take the cover off, and check to see if the net card has worked loose.
Reseat the card, and all's well. Put it all back together...and it goes offline again. Went through this loop 3 times.
Finally, one time I ran my hand down the far side of the case. (Since I was under a desk, I hadn't had the opportunity to really see the opposite side of it.)
He had lined his case with refrigerator strip magnets.
When the tissue was broken up, filtered to remove anything more than 200nm and the filtrate added to a sterile medium, the optical density - or cloudiness - of the medium increased.
This, the researchers argue, means the nanoparticles were multiplying of their own accord.
Doesn't sound exactly convincing. A lot of protein-like structures reproduce, but aren't considered to be alive. A good example is the prion that causes mad cow disease.
Personally, I think it's pretty horrible to defraud someone in this manner. While I'm sure this guy in the UK is not totally without blame, it seems pretty goddamn stupid to send someone a fraudulent package with a ring binder instead of a laptop and make them pay ~$300 in VAT
It's called street justice, my friend.
This guy wouldn't have gotten nailed for $300 if he hadn't tried to rob someone in the first place.
And as for the publicity, good. Maybe it'll stop the next guy from trying.
I always view calling a policeman or getting the law involved to be a last resort. If you can solve your problems on your own, more power to you. Here, we have crime, and we have just punishment. Bravo, guys.
I agree completely - I hadn't considered their core market when I posted. I probably should have said that they're not afraid of competition, as long as they have the windows OS revenue to back it up.
Yeah, any threat to their bread-and-butter OS sends them into a foaming frenzy. Like how they tipped Baystar into buying SCO stock, or how they ship stuff that has in the EULA that it must be run on a MS branded OS (to foil WINE with litigation, primarily).
And you're right about their speculative ventures...they're not afraid to make craters there. Primarily for the same reason, I'm guessing. They know their days of being the lead OS might be numbered, so they'll keep entering niche markets the same way you or I might buy a scratch-off lottery ticket. Which is what struck me as strange about the whole WiFi thing. Did it already pan out for them? What did MS find out that made them leave?
I hate to praise MS...but they don't make too many stupid business decisions. Makes me wonder.
Perhaps competition from Cisco (Linksys subsidiary), NetGear, and even Apple (which has a disproportionate marketshare) made MSFT blink.
We are talking about the same MS, right?
The same MS who jumped into the game console market with Sony and Nintendo? Who wrote Word and Excel, when the market already had Wordperfect and Lotus? Those guys? The ones who wrote Internet Explorer when Netscape was already on it's third release?
You can say what you like about MS, but don't say competition scares them. They look at an unentered market the same way Peg Bundy looks at a bon-bon. They know that they can intimidate and out-spend anyone on the planet. Even the law can't stop them, because they simply view the fines as a business cost.
A better question to ask would be why. Why would they leave a market, just when they're gaining share? This is what they live for. Move number two in this game is to take revenue from the other near-monopolies and turn this market opening into another monopoly, to fuel the next market they wish to exploit.
It can't be that they view the market as a brick wall. They didn't view the DOJ as a brick wall! I'm supposed to believe that after that, Cisco scares them?
I don't know why they left the market, but believe me...they have a good reason, and it's in everyone's best interest to figure out what it is. Especially the people who make WiFi equipment.
What would be involved in making CD copy protections work natively under WINE, without licensing the protection schemes from the vendors and doing a seperate implementation, like Transgaming does?
It seems to me that if you had a 100% MS emulation running, the copy protection would also function identically.
Slashdot Mirror
Finally we have to thank you Yanks for the actual colonisation of Oz by the Brits. If you hadn't had that little war of independence back a few years ago, the Brits would not have had to find a new location for their crims.
Jeez, just do what we did. All it takes is a few friends in the French navy.
And I would have grown up speaking with a North American accent ..
You should thank us for that. Y'all. ;^)
Weaselmancer
...just be sure to rub SPF 30 sunblock into your eyes before you try. Safety first!
Weaselmancer
Microsoft would merge with SAP the same way I merge with a cheeseburger.
Weaselmancer
Nasa has too much bandwith for God to count. They'll be fine.
I'm tempted to make a Soviet Russia joke about them Slashdotting us.
Weaselmancer
I just know some idiot will latch on to this and use it as an excuse why OSS is bad/evil/wrong.
See? We can tell Adobe to lock down their software to stop counterfeiting, and it happens. But not those OSS people. Having the source means you can change the source. It makes counterfeiting possible, promotes communism, and makes baby Jesus cry.
Unfortunately, it's not the software that's the problem - it's the law thinking it can mandate things like this that's the problem. But you watch - OSS is going to take a beating for this anyhow.
Weaselmancer
...now I can finish porting Duke Nukem Forever to Java!
Weaselmancer
...sorry. Someone had to say it.
Thank you AC! Didn't know such a thing existed.
But after a quick read, I found this:
All utility patent applications filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office after November 29, 2000 will be published if an applicant does not expressly request on filing that the application not be published. An applicant may make a request for non-publication if (1) the applicant has not filed the application in any other country that publishes applications; and, (2) the applicant does not intend to file the application in any country that publishes applications.
So, it's a little bit better, but not by a whole lot. You can still hide your applications, and it doesn't take into account things already "in the system."
I still say that serious reform needs to take place. But it's nice to know that the law already sees it, AC.
Weaselmancer
The National Academy of Sciences is calling for more funding for the patent office where 3,000 examiners handle 350,000 applications a year with an average of 17 to 25 hours to check on the validity of a patent application.
Businesses claim a lack of due diligence at this stage often results in patents being granted that should not see the light of day.
There you have it, the entire problem in a nutshell. Too much work, and not enough people.
And I have a solution.
Public review for patents. Open source meets patent reform.
Here's how the new system might work. Someone applies for a patent, and it gets posted to a website for public review.
That gives the public the ability to search for prior art. If prior art is found, even after the patent is granted...zap. The patent is invalid. And if the prior art is more than...say 5 years old, the idea is now public domain and no longer patentable.
Also, widen the definition of prior art. Best example of that I can think of off the top of my head is Intel patenting a method to detect overclockers. Measure the cpu clock versus an internal clock. Compare. If they differ by more than a small percentage, shut down. In other words, they managed to patent a binary counter. Bogus. Simply using an established widget in a new way shouldn't be patentable. No more Bezos "with a computer" patents.
And no patent should be granted for more than 5 years or so. This is important, otherwise we could wind up in a technological backwater. Small countries (with no extradition treaties with the US) would be the next Silicon Valley. You think you're being outsourced now? Just wait until you can't program at all in the US due to fear of litigation.
I think that it should be possible to have an idea, patent it, and make your million. But not at the expense of the entire tech sector.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to go double click something. ;^)
Weaselmancer
I mean seriously! Fucking double clicks????
I wonder if the asshat at the patent office realized that he had to double click at least once during the process of filing the stupid patent. Clearly, the people at the patent office are so far out of touch with reality that they can no longer be taken seriously.
So, I propose this for the new patent system (it's un-Slashdot of me, but not only am I bitching about something, I have an idea on how to fix it.)
Public peer review. Open source meets patent reform.
As soon as a patent is applied for, it is placed up on a website for public review. Then, it's up to the public as well as the patent office to try to find any prior art.
If prior art is found, the patent is denied. Period. And if the prior art is over 5 years old, it's considered a public domain idea, and no longer patentable. That'll keep idiots like the lawyersquad at MS from patenting other people's ideas. Like double clicks.
Weaselmancer
You know the joke about the whole SubGenius thing..."If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?"
Here is a prime example of why we are all SubGenii. We all knew that SCO would tank. We had a golden opportunity to make some serious cash. And you know what? I'll betcha not a single person on all of Slashdot cashed in on these fools. Damn.
It's not often you have a sure thing in a horse race. And I just missed mine. Double damn.
Weaselmancer
I know how to cook. Somewhat. But when I watch Alton do what he does, it puts "another tool in the toolbox." I learn a new trick, or a reason why, or something that'll make my next attempt better. Hopefully.
It's a lot like watching Bob Vila. He won't make anyone into a DIY guru. You won't be able to build a palace in your backyard just by watching him. But he'll show you a few new tricks, or how to use a tool properly, or something useful that you'll someday use.
Having more tools won't make you an artist, true. But it might make a budding artist more able to express himself.
Weaselmancer
Especially given Dawes' apparently grating personality (not a recommended trait for your project leader)
Hell, I thought a grating personality was a requirement for being a project leader.
Or maybe I've just been really unlucky with my career choices. ;^)
Weaselmancer
These days, it's a truth that most spammers have to break other laws to try to get their spam out. It's not like the old days of open relays and a trusting email network. Now, we have worm exploits, stolen identities, account phishing, hacked boxes...the list goes on and on.
We can pat ourselves on the back here, I think. Now that we're as a community becoming aware of the spam problem and doing something about it (like closing down open relays and blocking those who don't), spammers now have to break other laws to get their crap through.
And that makes them targets for prosecution. So, let's all give ourselves a round of applause here. If you closed an open relay, or wiped out a worm, you contributed to this!
Let's all keep up the good work.
Weaselmancer
Silent Running, IMDB.
Neat movie, very thought provoking and thoroughly creepy.
Weaselmancer
At one point, RR in northeast Ohio needed you to do some kinda logon before they'd pass packets for you. They had some Win software that would do a name/password thing.
A tech or friend of a tech there made "rrlinux", a GPL version of the same. Also a version of DHCP that was more RR friendly (RR's DHCP servers were a little flaky early on).
RR tech support web pages had Linux buttons to click that would take you offsite to this guy's personal web page for support.
Not as good as in-house support, but still nice.
Weaselmancer
The cover thing reminded me of a tech support story of mine.
I was doing support for some lawyers. Built them some PCs. One guy calls me after a week or two and says he can't get on the net.
So I arrive and test the PC. Yup. No net.
I do a little fiddling, then eventually take the PC out of the little wooden cubby hole in his desk to fiddle with it. I take the cover off, and check to see if the net card has worked loose.
Reseat the card, and all's well. Put it all back together...and it goes offline again. Went through this loop 3 times.
Finally, one time I ran my hand down the far side of the case. (Since I was under a desk, I hadn't had the opportunity to really see the opposite side of it.)
He had lined his case with refrigerator strip magnets.
Weaselmancer
Sounds like the LiveChat bot fails the Turing test. Neato!
Weaselmancer
From the article:
When the tissue was broken up, filtered to remove anything more than 200nm and the filtrate added to a sterile medium, the optical density - or cloudiness - of the medium increased.
This, the researchers argue, means the nanoparticles were multiplying of their own accord.
Doesn't sound exactly convincing. A lot of protein-like structures reproduce, but aren't considered to be alive. A good example is the prion that causes mad cow disease.
Weaselmancer
Not only that, but I saw commercials for the video game before the freaking movie was even out yet. I think that might be a first.
Weaselmancer
If you're going to go after Windows employees, don't bother with the registry and update guys. Nail the guys who made ActiveX and Outlook.
There ya go, I'm an informant now. When can I expect my check? =)
Weaselmancer
Personally, I think it's pretty horrible to defraud someone in this manner. While I'm sure this guy in the UK is not totally without blame, it seems pretty goddamn stupid to send someone a fraudulent package with a ring binder instead of a laptop and make them pay ~$300 in VAT
It's called street justice, my friend.
This guy wouldn't have gotten nailed for $300 if he hadn't tried to rob someone in the first place.
And as for the publicity, good. Maybe it'll stop the next guy from trying.
I always view calling a policeman or getting the law involved to be a last resort. If you can solve your problems on your own, more power to you. Here, we have crime, and we have just punishment. Bravo, guys.
Weaselmancer
Looks like a low power server to me. Or a GPS unit with software you can update. I'd sit one on the dash of my van.
It'd also be great for emulation. The thing just screams MAME. Or Ultimate Amiga Emulator.
How about portable network analyzer? It'll probably run standard Linux distros.
This thing is not a toy. Well..ok. It is a toy, but it's useful too.
Weaselmancer
Competition terrifies them.
I agree completely - I hadn't considered their core market when I posted. I probably should have said that they're not afraid of competition, as long as they have the windows OS revenue to back it up.
Yeah, any threat to their bread-and-butter OS sends them into a foaming frenzy. Like how they tipped Baystar into buying SCO stock, or how they ship stuff that has in the EULA that it must be run on a MS branded OS (to foil WINE with litigation, primarily).
And you're right about their speculative ventures...they're not afraid to make craters there. Primarily for the same reason, I'm guessing. They know their days of being the lead OS might be numbered, so they'll keep entering niche markets the same way you or I might buy a scratch-off lottery ticket. Which is what struck me as strange about the whole WiFi thing. Did it already pan out for them? What did MS find out that made them leave?
I hate to praise MS...but they don't make too many stupid business decisions. Makes me wonder.
Weaselmancer
Perhaps competition from Cisco (Linksys subsidiary), NetGear, and even Apple (which has a disproportionate marketshare) made MSFT blink.
We are talking about the same MS, right?
The same MS who jumped into the game console market with Sony and Nintendo? Who wrote Word and Excel, when the market already had Wordperfect and Lotus? Those guys? The ones who wrote Internet Explorer when Netscape was already on it's third release?
You can say what you like about MS, but don't say competition scares them. They look at an unentered market the same way Peg Bundy looks at a bon-bon. They know that they can intimidate and out-spend anyone on the planet. Even the law can't stop them, because they simply view the fines as a business cost.
A better question to ask would be why. Why would they leave a market, just when they're gaining share? This is what they live for. Move number two in this game is to take revenue from the other near-monopolies and turn this market opening into another monopoly, to fuel the next market they wish to exploit.
It can't be that they view the market as a brick wall. They didn't view the DOJ as a brick wall! I'm supposed to believe that after that, Cisco scares them?
I don't know why they left the market, but believe me...they have a good reason, and it's in everyone's best interest to figure out what it is. Especially the people who make WiFi equipment.
Weaselmancer
What would be involved in making CD copy protections work natively under WINE, without licensing the protection schemes from the vendors and doing a seperate implementation, like Transgaming does?
It seems to me that if you had a 100% MS emulation running, the copy protection would also function identically.
Weaselmancer