Don't believe everything you see in the movies (I'm looking at you Casino Royale). This would only be necessary in the case of trucks, vans, and SUVs as most cars won't flip by turning alone. Their center of gravity is low enough that street tires will skid on the pavement before there will be enough moment to rotate the vehicle.
I've left alternating (left-right) sets of skid marks in a compact car which argue otherwise. An untripped rollover is more difficult in a car, but not outside the realm of possibility. You probably have to involve the suspension, though; a single turn probably won't do it.
The Rault paper was published in 1989, not in the 60's. Less than 4 years before the CSIRO patent was filed. Moreover Rault's techniques, while similar to those being developed at the SAME TIME at CSIRO, were not those that led on to wifi as we know it.
Yes, the Rault paper (which includes all the techniques in the patent, just not one particular application) was published in 1989, years before the CSIRO patent was filed (it doesn't matter how many years, as long as it's greater than one year). COFDM itself was invented in the 1960s.
The Rault paper was put forward as prior art, examined and rejected. I don't know how to put it more simply.
You've put it too simply. The Rault paper was rejected as prior art because it didn't mention that the same techniques would work indoors. That's an indication that the system is broken, not a testament to the validity of the patent.
The research for which this patent was granted was THE thing that made modern wireless networking possible. It took radio data transfer from kilobits per second (where it had languished for some time) to a hundred megabits per second. At a time when you were using a 14k modem if you were lucky.
Too bad it was invented in the 1960's. CSIRO's patent amounts to "using COFDM indoors".
From one of the court papers on the subject: 'The trial court found that Rault disclosed several of the limitations of independent claims 42, 56, 68 -- the modulation means, the data reliability enhancement means, and the interleaving means. The district court did not find that Rault anticipated any of the claims, however, because the court found that Rault had failed to disclose the limitation, found in the preamble of each of the independent claims, that referred to the use of the invention "in a confined multipath transmission enviroment." The trial court construed the words "in a confined multipath transmission environment" to mean "in an indoor environment."'
Note that Rault (the author of a paper attempted to be used as prior art) DID address multipath. He just addressed it in the context of a moving vehicle in an urban environment, not an indoor environment".
So CSIROs $200M award was for... moving a radio indoors. (where, BTW, the problem is easier than a moving vehicle in an 'urban canyon'; indoors you have mostly static multipath (some dynamic due to things and people in the environment moving) and no Doppler, outdoors you have dynamic multipath and Doppler.)
But it's not just college loans. our entire culture has shifted so far toward individual wealth and away from the common good.
Now, that's the kind of talk that gets a sensible man locking away his wallet and reaching for his gun. Because you know it's going to be followed by a scheme to take away the sensible man's "individual wealth" and spread it around for the common good of those not-so-sensible. (and, for liberals out there, that includes your hated AIG executives as well as your darling poor).
And kids keep getting approved for loans because of government backing of those loans. Take away all of the student loan programs that are out there to "help" kids afford college, and maybe college would become affordable.
Yep. It's akin to health care; the costs are hidden (for most) which drives up demand, which drives up price. The problem with removing that distortion from the market is that some kids WILL fall off the bottom and not be able to go to college, which I don't have a problem with being an evil capitalist and all, but which the majority of handwringing egalitarians find totally unacceptable, despite the problems their approach has led to.
It's the same way here in the US. People just don't want to mention that because it implies paperwork for them. All 5 minutes worth of paperwork.
You can get forebearance on student loans, but interest still accumulates.
Best I can see, since student loans aren't dischargable in bankruptcy, if you're largely without assets and without sufficient employment, the sensible thing is just plain default on them and take the hit on your credit record. If you try to pay them and end up behind on your rent as a result, you'll find yourself out in the cold and _still_ unable to pay your student loan.
The real question is whether the job ever really required a PhD in the first place. Among well-known programmers and engineers without Phd's there is Bill Gates, Linus Torvalds, Steve Wozniak, and Will Wright.
I can't think of any programming job which would require an advanced C.S. degree (and in this I specifically include actual cutting-edge CS research stuff); I'm wondering if that's just the latest way of separating the wheat from the chaff; I'm starting to see a lot more jobs with requirements for an MSCS or even a Ph.D in CS. Quite irritating because some of the jobs look like stuff I could do well and would like but the recruiter will automatically bounce my resume for not having the magic M.S.
I find the best programmers are the ones with the maturity to complete a task when they said they would.
Ahh, the m-word, a great modern method of poisoning the well... who could argue against this, for to do so is to admit immaturity?
There are any number of reasons a programmer (or anyone, in fact) might not complete a task when they said they would. Few have anything to do with "maturity" per se. Most common is likely poor estimating skills. Another very common one is that some requirement for that task (outside the person's control) was not fulfilled; even if the programmer placed a caveat in his estimate, it gets conveniently forgotten by management. Or the programmer may have been subsequently given another task with higher priority.
Who can perform an exhaustive session of testing without complaining (even though it's boring, but necessary work).
Division of labor. Look it up. Developers shouldn't usually be doing that kind of exhaustive testing. Not only are they generally temperamentally unsuited for it, but their knowledge of the code can lead to gaps in the testing; the same mistaken assumptions which resulted in the bug can result in the test missing the bug. And if the developers are not only doing it, but doing it without complaining about it, it probably means they believe complaining about it will result in negative consequences... and therefore they're probably looking for another job where this isn't true.
Who will produce the required documentation to a high standard
So why is it you expect developers to be technical writers as well? Do you expect your tech writers to write code?
and will play nice with the other members of the team they are in.
Always good. Of course, since the developers seem to be the testers and the tech writers as well, interaction with the OTHER teams isn't an issue, is it?
When the waitress says "If you need anything else, my name is Betty" Joe Random grunts and takes a bite of his meal. Programmer dude wonders what her name is if he doesn't need any thing else.
And salesdude flirts with her, regardless of her looks, apparent age, or apparent marital status. (Or his marital status)
I read about a similar machine about a year ago. I don't know about anywhere else, but the Atlantic City gaming regulators disallowed it because it counts cards, and using a machine to count cards is illegal in Atlantic City -- that goes for the casinos too.
RIAA's CEO deserves the same fate as Mussolini of Italy, or King Louis of France, or Emperor Nero of Rome - all tyrants - all meeting the same fate.
Wouldn't matter. You could shoot him and abuse his body, guillotine him, or drive him to suicide with his letter opener, and the next RIAA CEO would continue in the same vein (only with better security). It's the organization which needs to be destroyed, not any individual head of it.
Star trek != hard SF. Star Trek = western in space. (Firefly is too, in case you missed the subtle-as-a-brick hint of the horses in the pilot)
Nevertheless, it does manage to sometimes to SF-style exploration of the impact of technology. ST:TNG had a lot on the subject of machine intelligence, obviously. All versions explored contact with alien cultures, and if the aliens were a little more human than one could wish for.. well, the same is true of written SF. Even some of the worst Star Trek episodes explored some SF themes -- "Spock's Brain" explored the degeneration of a culture which relied too much on technology, and "Miri" explored paedophi.. err, no, the danger of genetic engineering.
Wow, a 5GW circuit breaker... I just got a vision of jumping into a bulldozer in order to flick the enormous reset switch.
You have cascading reset switches. You flip a 440V 50A breaker, which fires a solenoid attached to the reset switch of the next size up, and so on. Unfortunately the copper required for the sixth-stage solenoids which hit the 5GW reset switches is about 70% of the budget for the project.
The idea that the universe somehow doesn't want something to happen, and so causes various improbable events to occur on the macro-level to prevent that thing to happen, is a fairly common SF plot. I even recall an SF-detective variant where the universe was arranging to kill scientists who would discover its secrets (eventually stopped when the detective demonstrated that leaving a trail of bodies is a poor way to hide anything).
It's hard to see a real physicist taking it seriously, except out of pure frustration or inebriation.
It's a great thing, but the cynical part (85.6%) of me wonders if this means we'll now be able to have national blackouts rather than just regional ones.
RIAA, MPAA: Look, no one is using ThePirateBay or any of those BitTorrent or peer-to-peer services any more. Nobody. There's no point in continuing to go after them, or those store and forward systems either. Just pay attention to Rapidshare and similar hosting services and you'll have stopped piracy in its tracks!
I am an employer. I can't imagine using a headhunter right now. Why? Because there are millions of people to choose from. I don't need help finding people at all.
You do, however, possibly need help finding the right employee in and among those millions. Unfortunately, most headhunters won't actually provide it.
Not sure (without hunting down that judgement) how given their extensive citing of Toyota products in their spec that they somehow convinced a court to award a win in 2005?
Patent trolling 101 1) Do a little research 2) Brainstorm a whole bunch of extensions to the things you've researched 3) Submit patent applications covering these extensions you've brainstormed 4) Wait for someone to invent something which could be covered by your patent 5) Sue!
The important part is your patent application must be convoluted enough so that for any given invention, you can credibly argue either that it's substantially different and thus not prior art (if it was invented earlier), or that it's substantially similar and is therefore infringing (if it was invented later). Fortunately, the Patent Office's total incompetence and the deference of the courts to the Patent Office makes this much easier.
It should go without saying that any patents generated by this technique are non-disclosive; that is, no expert in the field would actually learn anything by reading them, as no development was actually done.
Actually, they do have obligation, legally, to their users. We all know they can comply to DMCA takedown notices to gain legal protection. However, to gain legal protection from their users , MySpace would be required to put the content back up if a user contests a takedown, and then be able to provide the issuer of the takedown notice with that user's contact information.
A DMCA counter-notice requires that the counter-notifier agree to accept US jurisdiction. Bit of a pain (read: near-complete impossibility) for an independent artist in Scotland to meet Warner in a US Court without bankrupting himself.
Anyway, in practice service providers can simply ignore counter-notices because their users don't have the legal leverage to sue them productively. The record companies can sue for hundreds of thousands for copyright violation, the users, even if the service isn't free, can only sue for a few hundred for breach of contract.
With the "news" (circa 1998) that the rate of expansion of the universe is increasing, it seems to me that worries about the heat death of the universe should be put on hold. There's something (currently labeled "dark energy") about cosmology that we simply lack sufficient understanding of.
Stallman's a fanatic, but on the other hand, Microsoft is Microsoft. Which is to say, it's probably difficult to be too paranoid about their intentions with respect to competition. Stallman's article isn't even particularly paranoid; it boils down to "we've seen similar groups do bad things before, so we should watch this group. Also, we disagree with some of their goals".
BTW, Miguel, George Bush did not invent "Good vs Evil". And while I've never seen anything that approaches pure Good, there's no shortage of "sufficiently evil".
Slashdot Mirror
I've left alternating (left-right) sets of skid marks in a compact car which argue otherwise. An untripped rollover is more difficult in a car, but not outside the realm of possibility. You probably have to involve the suspension, though; a single turn probably won't do it.
Yes, the Rault paper (which includes all the techniques in the patent, just not one particular application) was published in 1989, years before the CSIRO patent was filed (it doesn't matter how many years, as long as it's greater than one year). COFDM itself was invented in the 1960s.
You've put it too simply. The Rault paper was rejected as prior art because it didn't mention that the same techniques would work indoors. That's an indication that the system is broken, not a testament to the validity of the patent.
Too bad it was invented in the 1960's. CSIRO's patent amounts to "using COFDM indoors".
From one of the court papers on the subject:
'The trial court found that Rault disclosed several of the limitations of independent claims 42, 56, 68 -- the modulation means, the data reliability enhancement means, and the interleaving means. The district court did not find that Rault anticipated any of the claims, however, because the court found that Rault had failed to disclose the limitation, found in the preamble of each of the independent claims, that referred to the use of the invention "in a confined multipath transmission enviroment." The trial court construed the words "in a confined multipath transmission environment" to mean "in an indoor environment."'
Note that Rault (the author of a paper attempted to be used as prior art) DID address multipath. He just addressed it in the context of a moving vehicle in an urban environment, not an indoor environment".
So CSIROs $200M award was for... moving a radio indoors. (where, BTW, the problem is easier than a moving vehicle in an 'urban canyon'; indoors you have mostly static multipath (some dynamic due to things and people in the environment moving) and no Doppler, outdoors you have dynamic multipath and Doppler.)
Now, that's the kind of talk that gets a sensible man locking away his wallet and reaching for his gun. Because you know it's going to be followed by a scheme to take away the sensible man's "individual wealth" and spread it around for the common good of those not-so-sensible. (and, for liberals out there, that includes your hated AIG executives as well as your darling poor).
Yep. It's akin to health care; the costs are hidden (for most) which drives up demand, which drives up price. The problem with removing that distortion from the market is that some kids WILL fall off the bottom and not be able to go to college, which I don't have a problem with being an evil capitalist and all, but which the majority of handwringing egalitarians find totally unacceptable, despite the problems their approach has led to.
It is? I'm paying something like $3500/year for primary and secondary education, and I don't even have any kids.
You can get forebearance on student loans, but interest still accumulates.
Best I can see, since student loans aren't dischargable in bankruptcy, if you're largely without assets and without sufficient employment, the sensible thing is just plain default on them and take the hit on your credit record. If you try to pay them and end up behind on your rent as a result, you'll find yourself out in the cold and _still_ unable to pay your student loan.
I can't think of any programming job which would require an advanced C.S. degree (and in this I specifically include actual cutting-edge CS research stuff); I'm wondering if that's just the latest way of separating the wheat from the chaff; I'm starting to see a lot more jobs with requirements for an MSCS or even a Ph.D in CS. Quite irritating because some of the jobs look like stuff I could do well and would like but the recruiter will automatically bounce my resume for not having the magic M.S.
Ahh, the m-word, a great modern method of poisoning the well... who could argue against this, for to do so is to admit immaturity?
There are any number of reasons a programmer (or anyone, in fact) might not complete a task when they said they would. Few have anything to do with "maturity" per se. Most common is likely poor estimating skills. Another very common one is that some requirement for that task (outside the person's control) was not fulfilled; even if the programmer placed a caveat in his estimate, it gets conveniently forgotten by management. Or the programmer may have been subsequently given another task with higher priority.
Division of labor. Look it up. Developers shouldn't usually be doing that kind of exhaustive testing. Not only are they generally temperamentally unsuited for it, but their knowledge of the code can lead to gaps in the testing; the same mistaken assumptions which resulted in the bug can result in the test missing the bug. And if the developers are not only doing it, but doing it without complaining about it, it probably means they believe complaining about it will result in negative consequences... and therefore they're probably looking for another job where this isn't true.
So why is it you expect developers to be technical writers as well? Do you expect your tech writers to write code?
Always good. Of course, since the developers seem to be the testers and the tech writers as well, interaction with the OTHER teams isn't an issue, is it?
And salesdude flirts with her, regardless of her looks, apparent age, or apparent marital status. (Or his marital status)
I read about a similar machine about a year ago. I don't know about anywhere else, but the Atlantic City gaming regulators disallowed it because it counts cards, and using a machine to count cards is illegal in Atlantic City -- that goes for the casinos too.
Wouldn't matter. You could shoot him and abuse his body, guillotine him, or drive him to suicide with his letter opener, and the next RIAA CEO would continue in the same vein (only with better security). It's the organization which needs to be destroyed, not any individual head of it.
Star trek != hard SF. Star Trek = western in space. (Firefly is too, in case you missed the subtle-as-a-brick hint of the horses in the pilot)
Nevertheless, it does manage to sometimes to SF-style exploration of the impact of technology. ST:TNG had a lot on the subject of machine intelligence, obviously. All versions explored contact with alien cultures, and if the aliens were a little more human than one could wish for.. well, the same is true of written SF. Even some of the worst Star Trek episodes explored some SF themes -- "Spock's Brain" explored the degeneration of a culture which relied too much on technology, and "Miri" explored paedophi.. err, no, the danger of genetic engineering.
You have cascading reset switches. You flip a 440V 50A breaker, which fires a solenoid attached to the reset switch of the next size up, and so on. Unfortunately the copper required for the sixth-stage solenoids which hit the 5GW reset switches is about 70% of the budget for the project.
The idea that the universe somehow doesn't want something to happen, and so causes various improbable events to occur on the macro-level to prevent that thing to happen, is a fairly common SF plot. I even recall an SF-detective variant where the universe was arranging to kill scientists who would discover its secrets (eventually stopped when the detective demonstrated that leaving a trail of bodies is a poor way to hide anything).
It's hard to see a real physicist taking it seriously, except out of pure frustration or inebriation.
It's a great thing, but the cynical part (85.6%) of me wonders if this means we'll now be able to have national blackouts rather than just regional ones.
Never. But was it actually common in 1906? I doubt it. Pianos aren't inexpensive, and have never been inexpensive.
RIAA, MPAA: Look, no one is using ThePirateBay or any of those BitTorrent or peer-to-peer services any more. Nobody. There's no point in continuing to go after them, or those store and forward systems either. Just pay attention to Rapidshare and similar hosting services and you'll have stopped piracy in its tracks!
"There you go again".
You do, however, possibly need help finding the right employee in and among those millions. Unfortunately, most headhunters won't actually provide it.
Patent trolling 101
1) Do a little research
2) Brainstorm a whole bunch of extensions to the things you've researched
3) Submit patent applications covering these extensions you've brainstormed
4) Wait for someone to invent something which could be covered by your patent
5) Sue!
The important part is your patent application must be convoluted enough so that for any given invention, you can credibly argue either that it's substantially different and thus not prior art (if it was invented earlier), or that it's substantially similar and is therefore infringing (if it was invented later). Fortunately, the Patent Office's total incompetence and the deference of the courts to the Patent Office makes this much easier.
It should go without saying that any patents generated by this technique are non-disclosive; that is, no expert in the field would actually learn anything by reading them, as no development was actually done.
A DMCA counter-notice requires that the counter-notifier agree to accept US jurisdiction. Bit of a pain (read: near-complete impossibility) for an independent artist in Scotland to meet Warner in a US Court without bankrupting himself.
Anyway, in practice service providers can simply ignore counter-notices because their users don't have the legal leverage to sue them productively. The record companies can sue for hundreds of thousands for copyright violation, the users, even if the service isn't free, can only sue for a few hundred for breach of contract.
With the "news" (circa 1998) that the rate of expansion of the universe is increasing, it seems to me that worries about the heat death of the universe should be put on hold. There's something (currently labeled "dark energy") about cosmology that we simply lack sufficient understanding of.
Stallman's a fanatic, but on the other hand, Microsoft is Microsoft. Which is to say, it's probably difficult to be too paranoid about their intentions with respect to competition. Stallman's article isn't even particularly paranoid; it boils down to "we've seen similar groups do bad things before, so we should watch this group. Also, we disagree with some of their goals".
BTW, Miguel, George Bush did not invent "Good vs Evil". And while I've never seen anything that approaches pure Good, there's no shortage of "sufficiently evil".