I agree with your point(s), my point is NOT the buying of the judge, but of the decision. All I am saying is that the amount of money required to defend a patent v MS may be (MUCH) lower in Europe than in USA.
If he is granted the patent in the U.S., then if he also applies for it from the EPO, he would be able to contest it in Europe too. Although I hate Dutch lawyers as much as any others, MS will not be able to buy a Dutch judges decision quite as easily as in USA.
IANAPE, but his claim in the states should count as prior art for some period for him in Europe, both in applying himself and stopping MS doing so. And MS does target the global market, so they cant do it in USA but not elsewhere....
Silly... less efficient than large scale counterparts... I can't see any [benefits to localizing the energe generation]
I don't even know where to begin! Converting organic matter to electricity on demand on a portable scale - and you dismiis it as silly!
I'm a bit rusty on my recycling but:
Primary: re-use for original purpose (e.g.
second-hand clothes)
Secondary: re-use for alternative purpose (e.g. clothes as wiping rags)
Tertiary: reclamation of materials (e.g. clothes as paper fibre)
Quaternery: reclamation of energy (e.g. burning the clothes to warm you up)
So unless you like eating someone elses left-overs, want to replant the seeds of the tomato they've eaten, or make a halloween pumpkin, you are left with energy or land-fill. Silly energy!?
I simply don't understand the argument that it is more efficient to gather the waste to a central location (by truck?), burn/convert it there, transmit across a high voltage line to your house, charge a NiCd, etc, than to stuff your leftovers in a CD size case and get energy provided by nature's best organic catalysts in the middle of no-where, or at the bottom of your loo.
Or were you planning to hook up all of Africa to the American grid? This would be ideal for families in developing countries to run a lamp bulb (or radio, or even a computer) off after 6 p.m. on the equator.
Team leader Chris Melhuish told New Scientist magazine said that although the new MCFs run on sugar cubes, the team aims to move on to carrot power.
"It has to be able to use raw materials, rather than giving it refined fuel."
I think you missed the point. At present, they probably do add water to the sugar. But they are aiming to process household wastes (carrot peels, sewage) rather than refined sugar (a pure carbohydrate like, er, petrol/gasoline).
If "real life" intruides on my gaming, I simply hit pause and come back to it later.
It is a multi-player game. In a turn based game (like the [card] games on yahoo), people going for pees, answering the phone, fetching a drink etc. can be a nuisance, but if they say brb, it at least gives the others a chance to pop away for a sec too. Of course, it could just be lag....
Now, if everyone is out for themselves in a last-man-standing battle, you need to leave, you accept the chance you might die/lose/whatever.
But lets imagine a real time strategy in which you are one of three allies (USA, Britain, Russia), fighting a 6 hour battle simulating WWII. Now lets imagine you are the US, and I am Winston Churchill. I've been managing my armies for the last three hours when my partner tells me dinner is ready.
Am I supposed to:
Tell her to fuck off?
Use my keyboard as a plate?
'Press pause' and tell the 5 (or 50) other players to wait for me to come back?
Let the computer do what its good at?
I'm not a hardcore player either; my mouse clogs up etc, and I hate micromanagement. This kind of stuff would work just fine - perhaps 24 hours a day (with me checking in daily for an hour to set budgets, initiate or even approve attack plans, etc.
Why stop at 13, 14, or 15? Why not go up to the length of a UUID (128 bits, i.e. about 40 decimal digits)?
One simple reason: space. The longer the barcode, the errrrr longer the barcode. As other posters have mentioned, 13 is a standard internationally, 12 used to be the standard in the USA. Barcodes can be hard to scan if dirty etc. Of course newer systems with more error checking do exist, but would require total replacement of hardware.
Also remember that just ten decimal digits would be enough to count every human alive. I assume there are less products in the world than that which need numbering than that! Remember that books get ISBNs (only 10 digits) too, etc.
Presumably you don't personally mind the tax free status you enjoy as an EPO employee (I know I wouldn't:)
Assuming that removing this status would roughly double the offices wage cost (which is obviously a major part of the budget), which would entail the costs of applying for a patent rising by a significant amount, what do you think the effects would be?
Less applications, those that apply can afford it anyway, what? Are the EU tax-payers supporting big business or the small inventor in this way? Not a troll, just hoping for a discussive answer!
GPS doesn't: it is based on WGS84 (World Geodetic System 1984).
Having said that, Europe for example has a different system, ETRS89, which is almost the same as WGS84, but takes in to account continental plate movement.
I'm glad it's funny, that was the intent. It is currently rated 3 funny, 3 overrated; I wish I knew what order they came in to see how overrated it was when you read it!
As to your troll, it is indeed sad how little I know anything (sic) about programming languages other than Delphi. Can you write a C compiler in C, AC? I have.
Of course it took 8 hours to 'develop'. 15 minutes to take the second photograph, 5 hours to make love to his mistress (he was French, remember), 15 minutes to go home to his wife, 2 hours to make love to his wife, 10 minutes to develop the second photograph, 10 minutes 'pondering the mysteries of love' in the dark room, and finally 10 more minutes to finish the first photograph.
In the third page of the article, he states he still believes in DRM & micropayments as a solution. Now for my rant:
There seems to be this idea that we have to pay for everything. Now that's fine to a degree, but sometimes it goes too far. Most of us in Europe (and the USA) have it pretty good; particularly those of us fortunate enough to be able to go online (not that I could live without, but it is a luxury). So the theory goes: Music is a luxury too, so everyone who wants it has to pay (whether they are able to afford it or not). Pay by listening to ads, pay by buying CDs. Same for films (on cable or video), same for software.
Now back to my title word: patronage. The current main patrons are advertisers, and to a much lesser degree governments. They both want something back: in the case of advertisers, up to 30% of the time you listen/watch; governments have a range of reasons from propoganda to the virtuous (e.g. Canadian Film Board). Why aren't there any other generous patrons? I mean, I've seen the Mona Lisa, and yes I had to pay to enter the Louvre, but that painting wasn't (first) sold with the idea of 'Hmm, nice smile, better get a million copies made up'. A patron paid to have a painting of his wife or whatever made (excuse any incorrectness, I may have the wrong example but this certainly happened in the past). To the best of my knowledge, there are times when the Louvre (and all Paris museums) can be entered for free; the normal charge is fair and goes to maintaining the existing collection and purchasing new. Why can't this happen with less scholarly entertainment?
So the big music companies see some challenge to their monopoly? Their business model is at risk (that of the artist isn't, there will always be demand for new art). Why not - instead of looking for new ways to fleece people - set themselves up as the new patrons of the arts? I'm not saying they should do this for nothing. I'm sure there would be plenty of people willing to be 'micro-patrons', but I'm equally certain they would want their money spread among the artists rather than going to shareholders. I can't see any of the current pack doing this (except perhaps Bertelsmann), for one simple reason: Greed. Not just by the companies, but also by the artists. (They say they want to be rich and famous, but when they start being hassled by the tabloids, they just want to be rich).
I've just realised there is a company which works somewhat like this, they make windows games run under linux and have a voting system to prioritize development (someone will have the details I'm sure, sorry but I'm in rant mode).
What really pisses me off is not the having to pay, it's the having to pay twice (or more). So micropayments every time I play a song (even if technically feasible) is not on. Hell, they'd probably want a song recognition system in your windpipe which would play ads if you sung unlicensed songs.
So we have the following situation: there are people who want to listen to music and/or watch tv, there are companies that want to get their message across, and their are artists who want to have their music heard while they can also feed their families (or snort coke). Could perhaps the companies sponsor the singers? Perhaps not one-to-one (e.g. whatever cola and that kid from the Jackson 5 who grew up to be white), but in a 'this artist brought to you by ' way. This is how 'soaps' got their name; big long soap commercials with a storyline. Most music videos are pretty crap (except for 'Girls on film', never liked a Duran Duran song till that video came out, still don't know any of the lyrics or much of the tune:), they could have giant product placements in the visuals or whatever.
Current commercials are awful, here at least they bump up the volume and then they are surprised that people skip/pee etc? If broadcasts of shows were interrupted by a good new song for a few minutes, people might actually be interested, even if the screen just showed some brandname.
BTW, I was kidding about Michael J., but I really don't know which coke brand. I know they had a red logo, but that doesn't really cut the field down much, does it? Just goes to show how well advertising works!
So in summary, lets have companies sponsor music (beer companies in nl do this quite a lot), and if the music companies want to survive, let them do it by offering a good product (e.g. well produced lyrics book), or by becoming the middlemen allowing the general public to become micro-patrons.
I managed to read this article at Toms just before it got posted here, and although the conclusion does state that the Athlon hasn't caught up with the P4 - and doesn't look like doing so either, I'm not sure if that should be considered a 'win' for Intel.
You see, in the middle of the article there is a list of comparative prices ($ per chip when buying 1000). The prices for a xx00 P4 are almost exactly the same as for a xx00+ Athlon, except for the highest end chips ($600 for the P4 2500).
So it seems as if Intel is finally challenged enough by AMD that they actually have to have the same prices for the same 'PR' in the mid-range. In my view that is a win for the consumer.
When the chunnel was being built, there were a whole bundle of suggestions. They included having a short bridge or tunnel section in the middle somewhere.
In Holland, there are huge 'bridges' in both Zeeland and the IJsselmeer. I use quotes because some of these are actually dikes, in particular the Afsluitdijk which crosses from North Holland to Friesland. These all still have locks or what have you which allow ships to pass.
Also Sicily is a bit easier to sail around than Great Britain, as the Vikings, Spanish and Nazis will attest. Err not that they all went round Sicily:)
I bought shares in eurotunnel way back when (and should have sold them when they were 3 times their initial price!) because I wanted to see the link to the UK happen (I'm British but born abroad [cue jokes]). The main reason they built a tunnel is because the English Channel is a VERY busy shipping lane. Now admittedly a 60 metre high suspension bridge should let most ships under it, but why bother?
In my opinion either a tunnel or a suspension bridge is overkill (or overspend, at least). Why not go with floating pontoon style bridges? Remember that although the earth may be more volatile in this part of the world, the Mediterranean harldy has tides and unlike the Channel is protected from the Atlantic storms.
Finally if you had bothered to read to the end of the article, the greens are against not because it would be ugly, but simple because the money could be better spent on a clean water supply for all the local population.
It seems to me Berlusconi wants a big memorial to his greatness!
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with your point(s), my point is NOT the buying of the judge, but of the decision. All I am saying is that the amount of money required to defend a patent v MS may be (MUCH) lower in Europe than in USA.
IANAPE, but his claim in the states should count as prior art for some period for him in Europe, both in applying himself and stopping MS doing so. And MS does target the global market, so they cant do it in USA but not elsewhere....
recursion: see recursion
I don't even know where to begin! Converting organic matter to electricity on demand on a portable scale - and you dismiis it as silly!
I'm a bit rusty on my recycling but:
- Primary: re-use for original purpose (e.g.
second-hand clothes)
- Secondary: re-use for alternative purpose (e.g. clothes as wiping rags)
- Tertiary: reclamation of materials (e.g. clothes as paper fibre)
- Quaternery: reclamation of energy (e.g. burning the clothes to warm you up)
So unless you like eating someone elses left-overs, want to replant the seeds of the tomato they've eaten, or make a halloween pumpkin, you are left with energy or land-fill. Silly energy!?I simply don't understand the argument that it is more efficient to gather the waste to a central location (by truck?), burn/convert it there, transmit across a high voltage line to your house, charge a NiCd, etc, than to stuff your leftovers in a CD size case and get energy provided by nature's best organic catalysts in the middle of no-where, or at the bottom of your loo.
Or were you planning to hook up all of Africa to the American grid? This would be ideal for families in developing countries to run a lamp bulb (or radio, or even a computer) off after 6 p.m. on the equator.
Gaah, nuff said.
"It has to be able to use raw materials, rather than giving it refined fuel."
I think you missed the point. At present, they probably do add water to the sugar. But they are aiming to process household wastes (carrot peels, sewage) rather than refined sugar (a pure carbohydrate like, er, petrol/gasoline).
According to the current poll, CowboyNeal "wins" 58% of the vote.
I don't think you think "Anonymity" means what I think it means!
It is a multi-player game. In a turn based game (like the [card] games on yahoo), people going for pees, answering the phone, fetching a drink etc. can be a nuisance, but if they say brb, it at least gives the others a chance to pop away for a sec too. Of course, it could just be lag....
Now, if everyone is out for themselves in a last-man-standing battle, you need to leave, you accept the chance you might die/lose/whatever.
But lets imagine a real time strategy in which you are one of three allies (USA, Britain, Russia), fighting a 6 hour battle simulating WWII. Now lets imagine you are the US, and I am Winston Churchill. I've been managing my armies for the last three hours when my partner tells me dinner is ready.
Am I supposed to:
- Tell her to fuck off?
- Use my keyboard as a plate?
- 'Press pause' and tell the 5 (or 50) other players to wait for me to come back?
- Let the computer do what its good at?
I'm not a hardcore player either; my mouse clogs up etc, and I hate micromanagement. This kind of stuff would work just fine - perhaps 24 hours a day (with me checking in daily for an hour to set budgets, initiate or even approve attack plans, etc.That's the point.
One simple reason: space. The longer the barcode, the errrrr longer the barcode. As other posters have mentioned, 13 is a standard internationally, 12 used to be the standard in the USA. Barcodes can be hard to scan if dirty etc. Of course newer systems with more error checking do exist, but would require total replacement of hardware.
Also remember that just ten decimal digits would be enough to count every human alive. I assume there are less products in the world than that which need numbering than that! Remember that books get ISBNs (only 10 digits) too, etc.
Assuming that removing this status would roughly double the offices wage cost (which is obviously a major part of the budget), which would entail the costs of applying for a patent rising by a significant amount, what do you think the effects would be?
Less applications, those that apply can afford it anyway, what? Are the EU tax-payers supporting big business or the small inventor in this way? Not a troll, just hoping for a discussive answer!
Having said that, Europe for example has a different system, ETRS89, which is almost the same as WGS84, but takes in to account continental plate movement.
More details at http://www.gps.gov.uk/additionalInfo/coordinateSys tems.asp
As to your troll, it is indeed sad how little I know anything (sic) about programming languages other than Delphi. Can you write a C compiler in C, AC? I have.
It can't be Java cos they lowercase the very first letter, and it surely can't be C; my C is rusty but shouldn't it be more like
So actually, the second photograph was first! :)
The second photo was taken 15 minutes later when his mistress finally finished taking off her many layers of undergarments.
There seems to be this idea that we have to pay for everything. Now that's fine to a degree, but sometimes it goes too far. Most of us in Europe (and the USA) have it pretty good; particularly those of us fortunate enough to be able to go online (not that I could live without, but it is a luxury). So the theory goes: Music is a luxury too, so everyone who wants it has to pay (whether they are able to afford it or not). Pay by listening to ads, pay by buying CDs. Same for films (on cable or video), same for software.
Now back to my title word: patronage. The current main patrons are advertisers, and to a much lesser degree governments. They both want something back: in the case of advertisers, up to 30% of the time you listen/watch; governments have a range of reasons from propoganda to the virtuous (e.g. Canadian Film Board). Why aren't there any other generous patrons? I mean, I've seen the Mona Lisa, and yes I had to pay to enter the Louvre, but that painting wasn't (first) sold with the idea of 'Hmm, nice smile, better get a million copies made up'. A patron paid to have a painting of his wife or whatever made (excuse any incorrectness, I may have the wrong example but this certainly happened in the past). To the best of my knowledge, there are times when the Louvre (and all Paris museums) can be entered for free; the normal charge is fair and goes to maintaining the existing collection and purchasing new. Why can't this happen with less scholarly entertainment?
So the big music companies see some challenge to their monopoly? Their business model is at risk (that of the artist isn't, there will always be demand for new art). Why not - instead of looking for new ways to fleece people - set themselves up as the new patrons of the arts? I'm not saying they should do this for nothing. I'm sure there would be plenty of people willing to be 'micro-patrons', but I'm equally certain they would want their money spread among the artists rather than going to shareholders. I can't see any of the current pack doing this (except perhaps Bertelsmann), for one simple reason: Greed. Not just by the companies, but also by the artists. (They say they want to be rich and famous, but when they start being hassled by the tabloids, they just want to be rich).
I've just realised there is a company which works somewhat like this, they make windows games run under linux and have a voting system to prioritize development (someone will have the details I'm sure, sorry but I'm in rant mode).
What really pisses me off is not the having to pay, it's the having to pay twice (or more). So micropayments every time I play a song (even if technically feasible) is not on. Hell, they'd probably want a song recognition system in your windpipe which would play ads if you sung unlicensed songs.
So we have the following situation: there are people who want to listen to music and/or watch tv, there are companies that want to get their message across, and their are artists who want to have their music heard while they can also feed their families (or snort coke). Could perhaps the companies sponsor the singers? Perhaps not one-to-one (e.g. whatever cola and that kid from the Jackson 5 who grew up to be white), but in a 'this artist brought to you by ' way. This is how 'soaps' got their name; big long soap commercials with a storyline. Most music videos are pretty crap (except for 'Girls on film', never liked a Duran Duran song till that video came out, still don't know any of the lyrics or much of the tune :), they could have giant product placements in the visuals or whatever.
Current commercials are awful, here at least they bump up the volume and then they are surprised that people skip/pee etc? If broadcasts of shows were interrupted by a good new song for a few minutes, people might actually be interested, even if the screen just showed some brandname.
BTW, I was kidding about Michael J., but I really don't know which coke brand. I know they had a red logo, but that doesn't really cut the field down much, does it? Just goes to show how well advertising works!
So in summary, lets have companies sponsor music (beer companies in nl do this quite a lot), and if the music companies want to survive, let them do it by offering a good product (e.g. well produced lyrics book), or by becoming the middlemen allowing the general public to become micro-patrons.
* Not supporting my (home) wheel mouse. Telling users they need new drivers is not an option!
* Losing an entire folder of bookmarks being dragged. The bookmark section in general needs a fair amount of work
Despite that, the pop-under tabbed browsing is the best thing since er the wheel mouse. I just want 'em both!
Forty-two? That should be easy compared to recharging the mobile phone in the middle of the Atlantic.
You see, in the middle of the article there is a list of comparative prices ($ per chip when buying 1000). The prices for a xx00 P4 are almost exactly the same as for a xx00+ Athlon, except for the highest end chips ($600 for the P4 2500).
So it seems as if Intel is finally challenged enough by AMD that they actually have to have the same prices for the same 'PR' in the mid-range. In my view that is a win for the consumer.
In Holland, there are huge 'bridges' in both Zeeland and the IJsselmeer. I use quotes because some of these are actually dikes, in particular the Afsluitdijk which crosses from North Holland to Friesland. These all still have locks or what have you which allow ships to pass.
Also Sicily is a bit easier to sail around than Great Britain, as the Vikings, Spanish and Nazis will attest. Err not that they all went round Sicily :)
I bought shares in eurotunnel way back when (and should have sold them when they were 3 times their initial price!) because I wanted to see the link to the UK happen (I'm British but born abroad [cue jokes]). The main reason they built a tunnel is because the English Channel is a VERY busy shipping lane. Now admittedly a 60 metre high suspension bridge should let most ships under it, but why bother?
In my opinion either a tunnel or a suspension bridge is overkill (or overspend, at least). Why not go with floating pontoon style bridges? Remember that although the earth may be more volatile in this part of the world, the Mediterranean harldy has tides and unlike the Channel is protected from the Atlantic storms.
Finally if you had bothered to read to the end of the article, the greens are against not because it would be ugly, but simple because the money could be better spent on a clean water supply for all the local population.
It seems to me Berlusconi wants a big memorial to his greatness!
Since the release notes are about 30 screens full, grab it first THEN check the release notes (that is, if you would ever bother to RTM).
Since when does encryption prevent duplication? Do these people never learn?
Euuw! Oh well, a dirty mind is a joy forever.
You mean I have a long lost aunt? Cool!