"If you're so clever answer this then. If a dropped cat always lands on its feet and dropped toast always lands butter side down, what happens if you strap a slab of toast butterside up, to the back of a cat and drop it out a window."
I'm sorry, but you're intruding on my patent. See, I patented this technology several years ago as a means of contragravity. But you've made a serious mistake in your description. Quite simply, the cat/spread begins to spin and hovers. The distance above the surface at which the invention hovers is based on a complex formula, but contains four variables: species and age of the cat, the type of spread, and the quality of the material below the invention.
That is, if you use butter and drop an adolescent tabby cat out the window, the cat invariably will land on its feet. This is because the spread/material quotient is non-optimized. If instead you drop the same tabby cat over an expensive, light-colored, Persian carpet and the spread is grape jam, then the cat will typically hover about 16.1415 cm above the surface. Naturally, other species of cats will vary the height, as will the age of the cat--so left to its own devices, the older cat will cause the balance to tip in favor of the spread and the carpet will be stained. (This was important when responding to a USPTO office action as they initially thought the invention might be a perpetual motion devices, and therefore, unpatentable.) Conversely, a kitten would spin so fast as to create instability in the system or even cause poor kitty to fly apart from the force.
My company's current project is to manufacture an enclosure that allows the cat to be used to create lift. The goal is to create a vehicle useful for local commutes. It operates similarly to the Wankel rotary engine, in that the walls are all lined with the same quality carpet (to maintain stability) and the spread is added as needed from an intake port. A slightly opened area on the bottom allows the force of the cat's rotation to generate lift (the exhaust port) on the appropriate surface. We believe if roadways were repaved with green outdoor carpeting, then we can solve reliance on petroleum-based fuels. Propulsion is generated by having two pairs of these devices that rotate as needed to push the vehicle forward.
Naturally, the cats will need to be changed out every few days due to nausea, dehydration and hunger. We also recommend that cats be replaced every six months for optimum performance.
Hey, if dark energy is possible, then so is the catatronic (tm) drive.
This issue begs the question. We have to take his word that he voted for himself, and that his wife likewise voted. Assume, if you will, that they both did not vote for him hoping to create an issue of voting machine fraud. We have the word of a politician and his wife that they voted thus. It's bad enough to trust the word of a politician.
"What the people who believed this will never happen are saying now?"
First the Democrats win Congress. Now Java is GPL. Next, they'll be telling me that terrorists are really nice guys having a bad hair day. There is only so much nonsense a rational mind can fathom.
"US District Judge Stephen Limbaugh . . . will be up for retention vote status this November 7th on the Missouri state ballot."
Um, sorry, but 1) Federal judges have life tenure and 2) if they did not have life tenure would not be on a state ballot. Obviously somebody was napping in their Government/Civics class---the poster and the editor who released onto/. Tenured judges are immune to popular opinion and are assumed to be able to make anti-majoritarian decisions like Miranda, Roe, and Fax-Spam. Conversely, elected state judges are more likely to be responsive to their constituents, which tends to be lawyers who fund their war chest.
So, the poster of this attack piece is trying to link the actions of a Federal judge to a state judge? While it appears they are related (Senior and Junior apparently being a dead give away), this is tantamount to punishing the son for the sins of the father. How about we try assessing the individual, elected, state judge for his own actions?
Tie the employee's pay raise into signing the code of conduct. A Contract is an exchange of benefits---if one side gives a benefit and the other does not, then it's a gift. So, the annual rote signing of the CoC represents a one-sided benefit. That is, the company benefits from the avoidance of porn, but the employee gets nothing. Contrastly, the increase in salary is a benefit given to the employee, because pay raises are not obligatory. By having the CoC signed in order to obtain a pay raise, then the CoC goes into the employee contract.
EULAs are not the same as Codes of Conduct. A EULA is a license between the copyright holder and the prospective user. In order to use the copyrighted work (i.e., enjoy the benefit of the product), then the user must pay for the work and sign the licensing agreement.
Perhaps Congress should shorten the life-cycle of software copyrights to ten years instead of 95?
My prognosis is they will lose. This is a trademark issue, and the two are not in a related marketing niche. That is, unless selling tubbing is the same as watching videos. I've been researching a similar trademark issue, and have seen cases where courts have not seen a similar marketing niche between two online purveyors of music. The plaintiff was a Christian music seller, and the other was not.
Very unlikely they'll succeed, especially with Google at the helm.
Of course, the worst thing to do with a C&D is comply immediately as that can become evidence of infringement. I'm sure Google will look for a lawyer.
Also, this is likely in response to the new deep pockets of Google . . .
When did price get into it? The grandparent post only cites the lack of community support for helping get the word out about successes. You rebut with a complaint about cost, which is not relevant to the grand-parent.
Regardless, you're getting an OS for free and yet complaining when some applications that can be run on it actually costs something?! That's rather unfair. OSS does not exist just for freeloading. Some people actually make a living off of it by providing value-added support or service. You are complaining about that value added service by the fact that those who make Win32 games available for Linux have to charge something, rather than pay for the entire thing out of pocket and gift it to you.
I'm sorry, that just does not work for me. That smacks of being ungrateful for those who are trying. I'm not saying there should be groveling and supplication, but at least a friendly nod would probably be appreciated.
The point is that there are some inroads made in Linux gaming---although not perfect. We as a community should at least acknowledge the effort made by those who are trying while simultaneously complaining that more-should-be-done. Otherwise, it sounds like those who are putting effort are being totally ignored.
"The simple question 'what is a software patent?' is suprizingly (sic) difficult."
Not that difficult. It's not really a software patent. It's a patent on a business practice---software is incidental in the implementation of that business practice.
I'd rather have had a JD write a book on Software Patents than a PhD.
"while lighter stars pick up speed and zip out to the cluster's periphery"
Where's a cop when you need one? I also would like to take offense to the statement that older, fatter stars move more slowly and drop down. This article is just begging for an intergalactic lawsuit.
My upgrade went smoothly, albeit long to download all the packages. I'm a Gentoo fan who converted to Ubuntu because I no longer have the time to play with a distro after an upgrade.
I've read about the problems with upgrades. The problem seems to be certain driver incompatibilities. For example, those with Nvidia chips seem not to have problems, while (I think) ATI users do. I am probably off on my examples (although, I'm an Nvidia user) but the underlying issue seems to be hardware conflicts.
"A drug company spends several hundred million to develop, test, and market a drug, and they get less than 20 years until generics can replace them. Milli Vanilli is supposed to get 95 years now? That's fair."
In the U.S., that's life of the author plus 70---which can commonly outstretch 95 years (which is limited to corporations).
I believe the British industry is pushing for a de facto compliance with the Berne Convention.
Your comments to my analogy proves my point---because I have impeded your right in some way, I have denied complete access. In both cases, you still remain in "possession," but your rights are nonetheless violated. When you hold an illegal copy of my work, then I do not have "complete access" to my work. (Analogzing the wife shows a non-physical right of exclusion, whereas the car shows the property right.
Use of a shovel to defend your property is "self-help," which could also be used to defend one's intellectual property (e.g. hacking your system, deleting the file and perhaps injecting a computer virus). In both cases, it would be wrong to engage in self-help---a simple contacting the appropriate enforcing authority would suffice.
Property _is_ a monopolistic right by nature---the right to use, destroy or exclude others (among other rights). While you own a house, you commonly have the right (via trespass) to exclude others, or the right to lease it to others. To enforce trespass or a breach of a lease, you resort to the courts (of which the police represent) for remedy.
When I create a copyrightable work, I have the right to use it and prevent you from using it (in my case, for the next conceivable 104 years). I have the right to license your use and deny licensing somebody else as I please. (You usually have the right to transfer that license via the doctrine of first sale, but you can contract that right away.)
I think the length of that monopoly has exceded the language of the Constitution; but that is a consequence of the Berne Convention and the subsequent "Disney" Millenial Copyright Act. I think 28 years in todo is sufficient, which is why I'll never be a Supreme Court justice. Of course, that means my kindergarden fingerpainted turkey would now be in the public domain.
"the owner still has complete access to [his] 'intellectual property', even if it's been 'stolen'."
Actually, you're all right and yet partly wrong. Property, even intellectual property, is a right to do many things with the property--including the right to deny others access (a.k.a. right of exclusivity). While the IP owner still has access, by making an unauthorized copy you are still taking (and therefore stealing) one of his rights. More importantly, by making his IP available to others, you are denying him his valid right to exclusivity.
If you had a wife, and I slept with her, have I violated your rights? You still have complete access to her---but not the same exclusive access you had. While wives are not property, marriage implies the same sort of exclusivity as IP law has.
Alternatively, if I put a boot on your car (and it's in your drive way and I have no other interest in your property) so you could not drive off, have I stolen your car? You still have complete access to it, right? No, you can't drive it, which is the primary purpose of having a car. The primary purpose of having IP (for the owner) is to grant selective access (e.g. by selling copies).
Granted, the ultimate purpose of IP is to enrich society by rewarding temporary monopolies to IP holders then making it public domain. The law being what I call "the live of Mickey Mouse" (e.g. author + 70y) is a bit excessive. If we were under the old-old standard (max 28 years), then all of the Beatles music would be public domain now, as would Elvis music and the original Star Wars release. You can thank Berne for that.
"Athletes are not exactly known for their creativity or intelligence."
You obviously missed the Florida game this weekend. I would say the athletes were being very creative after the play didn't go the way they wanted.
What I really like about the article is how we'll never know how accurate they are. So, I will make a prediction. In the next 100K years, our planet will likely have been hit by a pretty big meteor. Of course, "pretty big" is negotiable.
I think this defense should be the one he goes with. I mean, it takes a sick bitch to kill herself then hide her body. She had to have planned it for weeks.
Seriously, though, how hard would it be to splatter one's own blood in your home and ex-husband's car, then flee the country?
* Package installs---where a suite of extensions suitable to a given task are grouped. For example, web developers favor certain extensions that help them do their work. Others may want a Google suite, etc.
Give him a break. Hungary was once a Soviet satellite. This is penny-ante stuff in comparison to old-school Soviet tactics. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungary]
But, for what it's worth, Courts have the special circumstances rule that lowers a U.S. citizen's enjoyment of Fourth Amendment rights under conditions where the risk of not searching is so much higher that "reasonable" is lower. For example, if I told you that one out of 1,000 people in a room had a bomb, would it be unreasonable to search everybody? The risk of allowing terrorists another shot in playing kamakazi is high enough to make otherwise excessive tactics reasonable.
If you want to change that, then help stop global terrorism instead of bitching about your rights being trampled upon.
I'm deeply troubled that the monitoring script is written in Perl. That language isn't sexy enough anymore for _real_ programming. Besides, there's little documentation, so some maintainer will decide to change the code to make it look more active-voice. For example:
run_1984($RFID) if ($country_trust_level{$RFID->citizenship} 5);
I challenge any Perl programmers to write this in a much more obfuscated way.
YouTube is not, in my mind at least, capable of censoring. YouTube is a private enterprise, not the Government. You have no First Amendment recourse against YouTube. As there is no recourse, there is no censoring.
When I was a kid (late-70s, early-80s), I remember reading articles that lamented the fact that 1) nuclear fuel for power plants would be spent by the mid-90s 2) petroleum reserves would be expended by 2020 and 3) coal reserves would be expended by 2120.
I've stopped believing forecasts of available resources. I consider myself a Conservative, but economically speaking it's obvious that to conserve energy resources is the right thing to do. It's not about the environment---I say bludgen a seal if you want. It's not about national security---we could just take if we really wanted to. It's a matter of waste---don't use it if you don't need it; if you _need_ it, then find a way to use less.
Slashdot Mirror
"If you're so clever answer this then. If a dropped cat always lands on its feet and dropped toast always lands butter side down, what happens if you strap a slab of toast butterside up, to the back of a cat and drop it out a window."
I'm sorry, but you're intruding on my patent. See, I patented this technology several years ago as a means of contragravity. But you've made a serious mistake in your description. Quite simply, the cat/spread begins to spin and hovers. The distance above the surface at which the invention hovers is based on a complex formula, but contains four variables: species and age of the cat, the type of spread, and the quality of the material below the invention.
That is, if you use butter and drop an adolescent tabby cat out the window, the cat invariably will land on its feet. This is because the spread/material quotient is non-optimized. If instead you drop the same tabby cat over an expensive, light-colored, Persian carpet and the spread is grape jam, then the cat will typically hover about 16.1415 cm above the surface. Naturally, other species of cats will vary the height, as will the age of the cat--so left to its own devices, the older cat will cause the balance to tip in favor of the spread and the carpet will be stained. (This was important when responding to a USPTO office action as they initially thought the invention might be a perpetual motion devices, and therefore, unpatentable.) Conversely, a kitten would spin so fast as to create instability in the system or even cause poor kitty to fly apart from the force.
My company's current project is to manufacture an enclosure that allows the cat to be used to create lift. The goal is to create a vehicle useful for local commutes. It operates similarly to the Wankel rotary engine, in that the walls are all lined with the same quality carpet (to maintain stability) and the spread is added as needed from an intake port. A slightly opened area on the bottom allows the force of the cat's rotation to generate lift (the exhaust port) on the appropriate surface. We believe if roadways were repaved with green outdoor carpeting, then we can solve reliance on petroleum-based fuels. Propulsion is generated by having two pairs of these devices that rotate as needed to push the vehicle forward.
Naturally, the cats will need to be changed out every few days due to nausea, dehydration and hunger. We also recommend that cats be replaced every six months for optimum performance.
Hey, if dark energy is possible, then so is the catatronic (tm) drive.
"It's the 'Gore effect'. Wherever he goes to talk about global warming sees historic cold weather for the duration of his stay."
That's just God giving him the cold shoulder.
This issue begs the question. We have to take his word that he voted for himself, and that his wife likewise voted. Assume, if you will, that they both did not vote for him hoping to create an issue of voting machine fraud. We have the word of a politician and his wife that they voted thus. It's bad enough to trust the word of a politician.
"What the people who believed this will never happen are saying now?"
First the Democrats win Congress. Now Java is GPL. Next, they'll be telling me that terrorists are really nice guys having a bad hair day. There is only so much nonsense a rational mind can fathom.
And I thought Java was written in Python.
"a copyrighted Firefox logo"
Point of order: trademarked logo. Logos are trademarked, not copyrighted.
"US District Judge Stephen Limbaugh . . . will be up for retention vote status this November 7th on the Missouri state ballot."
/. Tenured judges are immune to popular opinion and are assumed to be able to make anti-majoritarian decisions like Miranda, Roe, and Fax-Spam. Conversely, elected state judges are more likely to be responsive to their constituents, which tends to be lawyers who fund their war chest.
Um, sorry, but 1) Federal judges have life tenure and 2) if they did not have life tenure would not be on a state ballot. Obviously somebody was napping in their Government/Civics class---the poster and the editor who released onto
So, the poster of this attack piece is trying to link the actions of a Federal judge to a state judge? While it appears they are related (Senior and Junior apparently being a dead give away), this is tantamount to punishing the son for the sins of the father. How about we try assessing the individual, elected, state judge for his own actions?
Tie the employee's pay raise into signing the code of conduct. A Contract is an exchange of benefits---if one side gives a benefit and the other does not, then it's a gift. So, the annual rote signing of the CoC represents a one-sided benefit. That is, the company benefits from the avoidance of porn, but the employee gets nothing. Contrastly, the increase in salary is a benefit given to the employee, because pay raises are not obligatory. By having the CoC signed in order to obtain a pay raise, then the CoC goes into the employee contract.
EULAs are not the same as Codes of Conduct. A EULA is a license between the copyright holder and the prospective user. In order to use the copyrighted work (i.e., enjoy the benefit of the product), then the user must pay for the work and sign the licensing agreement.
Perhaps Congress should shorten the life-cycle of software copyrights to ten years instead of 95?
Thank God I eat beef and pork and chicken. None of these face being depleted by over-fishing.
My prognosis is they will lose. This is a trademark issue, and the two are not in a related marketing niche. That is, unless selling tubbing is the same as watching videos. I've been researching a similar trademark issue, and have seen cases where courts have not seen a similar marketing niche between two online purveyors of music. The plaintiff was a Christian music seller, and the other was not.
Very unlikely they'll succeed, especially with Google at the helm.
Of course, the worst thing to do with a C&D is comply immediately as that can become evidence of infringement. I'm sure Google will look for a lawyer.
Also, this is likely in response to the new deep pockets of Google . . .
When did price get into it? The grandparent post only cites the lack of community support for helping get the word out about successes. You rebut with a complaint about cost, which is not relevant to the grand-parent.
Regardless, you're getting an OS for free and yet complaining when some applications that can be run on it actually costs something?! That's rather unfair. OSS does not exist just for freeloading. Some people actually make a living off of it by providing value-added support or service. You are complaining about that value added service by the fact that those who make Win32 games available for Linux have to charge something, rather than pay for the entire thing out of pocket and gift it to you.
I'm sorry, that just does not work for me. That smacks of being ungrateful for those who are trying. I'm not saying there should be groveling and supplication, but at least a friendly nod would probably be appreciated.
The point is that there are some inroads made in Linux gaming---although not perfect. We as a community should at least acknowledge the effort made by those who are trying while simultaneously complaining that more-should-be-done. Otherwise, it sounds like those who are putting effort are being totally ignored.
I use FAT for OS-swapping between Linux and Windows. Works just fine both ways. So, what's your point again?
"The simple question 'what is a software patent?' is suprizingly (sic) difficult."
Not that difficult. It's not really a software patent. It's a patent on a business practice---software is incidental in the implementation of that business practice.
I'd rather have had a JD write a book on Software Patents than a PhD.
"while lighter stars pick up speed and zip out to the cluster's periphery"
Where's a cop when you need one? I also would like to take offense to the statement that older, fatter stars move more slowly and drop down. This article is just begging for an intergalactic lawsuit.
My upgrade went smoothly, albeit long to download all the packages. I'm a Gentoo fan who converted to Ubuntu because I no longer have the time to play with a distro after an upgrade.
I've read about the problems with upgrades. The problem seems to be certain driver incompatibilities. For example, those with Nvidia chips seem not to have problems, while (I think) ATI users do. I am probably off on my examples (although, I'm an Nvidia user) but the underlying issue seems to be hardware conflicts.
"A drug company spends several hundred million to develop, test, and market a drug, and they get less than 20 years until generics can replace them. Milli Vanilli is supposed to get 95 years now? That's fair."
In the U.S., that's life of the author plus 70---which can commonly outstretch 95 years (which is limited to corporations).
I believe the British industry is pushing for a de facto compliance with the Berne Convention.
Your comments to my analogy proves my point---because I have impeded your right in some way, I have denied complete access. In both cases, you still remain in "possession," but your rights are nonetheless violated. When you hold an illegal copy of my work, then I do not have "complete access" to my work. (Analogzing the wife shows a non-physical right of exclusion, whereas the car shows the property right.
Use of a shovel to defend your property is "self-help," which could also be used to defend one's intellectual property (e.g. hacking your system, deleting the file and perhaps injecting a computer virus). In both cases, it would be wrong to engage in self-help---a simple contacting the appropriate enforcing authority would suffice.
Property _is_ a monopolistic right by nature---the right to use, destroy or exclude others (among other rights). While you own a house, you commonly have the right (via trespass) to exclude others, or the right to lease it to others. To enforce trespass or a breach of a lease, you resort to the courts (of which the police represent) for remedy.
When I create a copyrightable work, I have the right to use it and prevent you from using it (in my case, for the next conceivable 104 years). I have the right to license your use and deny licensing somebody else as I please. (You usually have the right to transfer that license via the doctrine of first sale, but you can contract that right away.)
I think the length of that monopoly has exceded the language of the Constitution; but that is a consequence of the Berne Convention and the subsequent "Disney" Millenial Copyright Act. I think 28 years in todo is sufficient, which is why I'll never be a Supreme Court justice. Of course, that means my kindergarden fingerpainted turkey would now be in the public domain.
"the owner still has complete access to [his] 'intellectual property', even if it's been 'stolen'."
Actually, you're all right and yet partly wrong. Property, even intellectual property, is a right to do many things with the property--including the right to deny others access (a.k.a. right of exclusivity). While the IP owner still has access, by making an unauthorized copy you are still taking (and therefore stealing) one of his rights. More importantly, by making his IP available to others, you are denying him his valid right to exclusivity.
If you had a wife, and I slept with her, have I violated your rights? You still have complete access to her---but not the same exclusive access you had. While wives are not property, marriage implies the same sort of exclusivity as IP law has.
Alternatively, if I put a boot on your car (and it's in your drive way and I have no other interest in your property) so you could not drive off, have I stolen your car? You still have complete access to it, right? No, you can't drive it, which is the primary purpose of having a car. The primary purpose of having IP (for the owner) is to grant selective access (e.g. by selling copies).
Granted, the ultimate purpose of IP is to enrich society by rewarding temporary monopolies to IP holders then making it public domain. The law being what I call "the live of Mickey Mouse" (e.g. author + 70y) is a bit excessive. If we were under the old-old standard (max 28 years), then all of the Beatles music would be public domain now, as would Elvis music and the original Star Wars release. You can thank Berne for that.
"Athletes are not exactly known for their creativity or intelligence."
You obviously missed the Florida game this weekend. I would say the athletes were being very creative after the play didn't go the way they wanted.
What I really like about the article is how we'll never know how accurate they are. So, I will make a prediction. In the next 100K years, our planet will likely have been hit by a pretty big meteor. Of course, "pretty big" is negotiable.
"4. The bitch set me up (Marion Barry)"
I think this defense should be the one he goes with. I mean, it takes a sick bitch to kill herself then hide her body. She had to have planned it for weeks.
Seriously, though, how hard would it be to splatter one's own blood in your home and ex-husband's car, then flee the country?
I'd like to expand on this.
* Package installs---where a suite of extensions suitable to a given task are grouped. For example, web developers favor certain extensions that help them do their work. Others may want a Google suite, etc.
Give him a break. Hungary was once a Soviet satellite. This is penny-ante stuff in comparison to old-school Soviet tactics. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungary]
But, for what it's worth, Courts have the special circumstances rule that lowers a U.S. citizen's enjoyment of Fourth Amendment rights under conditions where the risk of not searching is so much higher that "reasonable" is lower. For example, if I told you that one out of 1,000 people in a room had a bomb, would it be unreasonable to search everybody? The risk of allowing terrorists another shot in playing kamakazi is high enough to make otherwise excessive tactics reasonable.
If you want to change that, then help stop global terrorism instead of bitching about your rights being trampled upon.
I'm deeply troubled that the monitoring script is written in Perl. That language isn't sexy enough anymore for _real_ programming. Besides, there's little documentation, so some maintainer will decide to change the code to make it look more active-voice. For example:
run_1984($RFID) if ($country_trust_level{$RFID->citizenship} 5);
I challenge any Perl programmers to write this in a much more obfuscated way.
YouTube is not, in my mind at least, capable of censoring. YouTube is a private enterprise, not the Government. You have no First Amendment recourse against YouTube. As there is no recourse, there is no censoring.
When I was a kid (late-70s, early-80s), I remember reading articles that lamented the fact that 1) nuclear fuel for power plants would be spent by the mid-90s 2) petroleum reserves would be expended by 2020 and 3) coal reserves would be expended by 2120.
I've stopped believing forecasts of available resources. I consider myself a Conservative, but economically speaking it's obvious that to conserve energy resources is the right thing to do. It's not about the environment---I say bludgen a seal if you want. It's not about national security---we could just take if we really wanted to. It's a matter of waste---don't use it if you don't need it; if you _need_ it, then find a way to use less.