Just becuase they always say this does not mean that it could not be true, quote from Steve Case,
"What I've figured out is that I can predict the future, I just can't predict when."
Just becuase a particular technology has not kicked something off the pedestal does not mean something will. If you take a look at DVD's, they are really cheap to buy, they don't take up much space, and they are easy to reproduce. A person can have their own DVD burning operation for $10,000. I don't think anything before has quite reached that potential of reproduction, and it also has high quality. All the parts are there, it is just a question if this will be the technology to do it.
Given all the positives of DVDs and all the negatives of Theaters I believe that it is a realistic view. Does this mean all theaters will disappear, no, just like the movies did not kill live theater. But I can think of 3 of theaters in my area closing with about 20 theaters total in the area, I do believe it is a hurting industry.
IP is the big stuff, while steel tariffs and agricultural subsidies deal with an object of substance it is the IP that determines a countries true value and potential. You take that away from a developing country they will always be beholding to someone else.
Extreme protections of IP are basically giving a monopoly on a product to someone, and says that basically everyone is beholding to them for an extreme amount of time. Steel tariffs are just protecting a few people(relatively speaking), in a low margin industry that anyone can get into. The future is not in making steel, it is what you can do with it. Protection of IP is basically an attempt to tell someone what they can, or cannot do with it.
It is quicker to Get to the US from China, than the other way around. From what I understand it is the mainly refers to the Jet Stream and whether you are heading into it jet stream or fighting against it.
It is all these darn new games. You see, they keep requiring faster and faster hardware to run them but not everyone can keep up. Take this internet cafe, I bet it was a machine that was at 2 years old.
I doubt that he died playing anything, I think he was still waiting for it load up past the introduce cinematic, or he was trying to see some booty on a Flash web site, the load times on something like that would kill anybody.
This just made me think of something, what is to stop animals from still eating the stuff. I mean, you grow this giant grass field in the hopes gather up some arsenic, but deer live there too. They eat the plants die of poisoning, or they become easy meat(literally speaking) for carnivores. The arsenic accomulation ends up killing off the wolves/bears/rabid squirrels that eat deer.
So now that are good intentions have gone astray, and we throw the eco-system out of balance again, so I wonder did anyone think of that?
I cannot believe that this was modded as Funny. I think insightful, or Informative would be better. I cannot begin to think of the number of times I have gone back and rewrote something over just because it was just not right enough.
But then again I am not a professional software developer and don't have a due date to meet.
My point is that people don't seem to use common sense when writing legal documents, which include patents
Take this small bit of legal code that I found just out on the internet, here is the link
To the extent that items within this Article are also within Articles 3 and 8, they are subject to those Articles. If there is conflict, this Article governs Article 3, but Article 8 governs this Article.
This might be acceptable computer code but when you do something like this in a legal document, which is supposed to help clearify things, you end up creating confusion. Why do you think that lawyers have such a strangle hold of the system. Because they make it hard to read so only some who works with all the time can work with efficiently. The above example could be broken down to something clearer but imagine taking a complex idea and then adding to the complexity of a patent by written unclear or something filled in with made up jaragon.
Basically if the concept cannot be explained in which a reasonably intellect person can understand it, reject and make them do a better job of writing instead of just the PTO just saying screw let everyone else figure it out.
The real money will come in when some consumers get to together a class-action lawsuit. First the government sues you to get the ball rolling but then record stores, or consumer groups sue them again for the same issue and they go the big bucks. It would suprise me to see this coming up soon.
My step-mother is also an optometrist. When I asked her about it she said that is safe and would recommend to me or my father(her husband). So it seems it is far from being a universal opinion on whether it is a good or a bad thing.
I have considered it, considering without contacts I would probably qualify as being blind. I cannot even read a monitor without my face being with 5 or 6 inches away. For now I have decided it is too much money and not enough of a hassle to bother with. Maybe if I go somewhere were I cannot have easy access to contacts and solution regularly.
They are trying to crack down on abundant claims and too-technical jargon which they claim overworks the examiners, reduces the quality of the patent, and other things.
This is one of the big things I hate about the government and the law, they insist on keeping all this cavots from times based. Hello, the engilsh language has changed how about you change with them. If it is too-technical, reject it, tell them to rewrite it, too much jaragon, reject it and tell them to use some common english.
It would seem like common sense that if they required the patents to simplier to explain, then they can reduce the amount of work they do. Does this mean it is easy to explain complicated concepts in simple terms? No, but alot of technical jaragon is just wasted space trying to make something from little substanance.
Big business has this problem too, the difference is that business can decide it wants to work with a clean slate, the government can't/won't
This is just like Dungeon and Dragons, they said it contributed to murders, suicide, and increased violence.
Funny how an increase in violent videos managed to contribute to decreased violent crimes throughout the 90's. Oh, that does not count that was the improved economy, with a weak economy there is increase in crime. So what they need to do is outlaw the economy taking a downturn, because THAT will prevent violence...
Yeah and the Windows 98/ME Administrator account totally prevents this, right? The fact is, the IT staff had a problem, and they figure the easiest way to resolve the problem is to blame the students and tell them to do something that you want. It has nothing to do with which OS they are using, If there was a version of Windows XP+ out there they would be blaming Windows Xp for having a security hole and that students now have to have XP+ installed instead. It is typical MS thinking, upgrade so that your current problems will go away.
Slashdot Mirror
Just becuase they always say this does not mean that it could not be true, quote from Steve Case,
"What I've figured out is that I can predict the future, I just can't predict when."
Just becuase a particular technology has not kicked something off the pedestal does not mean something will. If you take a look at DVD's, they are really cheap to buy, they don't take up much space, and they are easy to reproduce. A person can have their own DVD burning operation for $10,000. I don't think anything before has quite reached that potential of reproduction, and it also has high quality. All the parts are there, it is just a question if this will be the technology to do it.
Given all the positives of DVDs and all the negatives of Theaters I believe that it is a realistic view. Does this mean all theaters will disappear, no, just like the movies did not kill live theater. But I can think of 3 of theaters in my area closing with about 20 theaters total in the area, I do believe it is a hurting industry.
IP is the big stuff, while steel tariffs and agricultural subsidies deal with an object of substance it is the IP that determines a countries true value and potential. You take that away from a developing country they will always be beholding to someone else.
Extreme protections of IP are basically giving a monopoly on a product to someone, and says that basically everyone is beholding to them for an extreme amount of time. Steel tariffs are just protecting a few people(relatively speaking), in a low margin industry that anyone can get into. The future is not in making steel, it is what you can do with it. Protection of IP is basically an attempt to tell someone what they can, or cannot do with it.
A. After it is released what is the ETA of the hack that will work around Palladium?
B. How many months will it be before MS comes out with a patch for the above mentioned hack?
It is quicker to Get to the US from China, than the other way around. From what I understand it is the mainly refers to the Jet Stream and whether you are heading into it jet stream or fighting against it.
I think that this says it all,
Sheila Broflovski: Just remember what the MPAA says: Horrific, deplorable violence is okay, as long as people don't say any naughty words!
(I have no idea how, and I don't have time to learn it)
When it comes to the windows world, the above statement says it all.
I am sure that Windows will weather any bad press comes from this weather you are comparing Windows Security to Linux or even TCO.
In the News, Webster has copyrighted the English language, from now on all news and comments on slashdot will be posted only in Pig Latin.
Isthay eallyray uckssay!
or the third, or the fourth one either. Talking about whipping a dead, and then a decaying horse.
TRANSFORM!
With the location of his next victim too so that he can be caught.
It is all these darn new games. You see, they keep requiring faster and faster hardware to run them but not everyone can keep up. Take this internet cafe, I bet it was a machine that was at 2 years old.
I doubt that he died playing anything, I think he was still waiting for it load up past the introduce cinematic, or he was trying to see some booty on a Flash web site, the load times on something like that would kill anybody.
This just made me think of something, what is to stop animals from still eating the stuff. I mean, you grow this giant grass field in the hopes gather up some arsenic, but deer live there too. They eat the plants die of poisoning, or they become easy meat(literally speaking) for carnivores. The arsenic accomulation ends up killing off the wolves/bears/rabid squirrels that eat deer.
So now that are good intentions have gone astray, and we throw the eco-system out of balance again, so I wonder did anyone think of that?
About the same time they started giving away something [microsoft.com] for which they should have charged.
There was an error in your statement, let me fix it,
About the same time they started giving away something for which they couldn't charge for...
I know, I know, it is easy to get lost in the minor details of something like that! :)
Can I recommend this Post as a selection to the "More Aggravating Phraselet..." slashdot poll?
I cannot believe that this was modded as Funny. I think insightful, or Informative would be better. I cannot begin to think of the number of times I have gone back and rewrote something over just because it was just not right enough.
But then again I am not a professional software developer and don't have a due date to meet.
- Windows 95
- Windows 98/ME
- Windows NT
- Windows 2000
- Windows XP
Wait, there are more than 5?Beavis & Butthead, what about South Park, consider what the difference was between the TV show and the movie.
If they could do that ANYBODY has a shot of making a good movie(a said a shot, did not say they would)!
So the only thing different? A further expanded plot.
The Simpsons?! They had a plot??
My point is that people don't seem to use common sense when writing legal documents, which include patents
Take this small bit of legal code that I found just out on the internet, here is the link
To the extent that items within this Article are also within Articles 3 and 8, they are subject to those Articles. If there is conflict, this Article governs Article 3, but Article 8 governs this Article.
This might be acceptable computer code but when you do something like this in a legal document, which is supposed to help clearify things, you end up creating confusion. Why do you think that lawyers have such a strangle hold of the system. Because they make it hard to read so only some who works with all the time can work with efficiently. The above example could be broken down to something clearer but imagine taking a complex idea and then adding to the complexity of a patent by written unclear or something filled in with made up jaragon.
Basically if the concept cannot be explained in which a reasonably intellect person can understand it, reject and make them do a better job of writing instead of just the PTO just saying screw let everyone else figure it out.
The real money will come in when some consumers get to together a class-action lawsuit. First the government sues you to get the ball rolling but then record stores, or consumer groups sue them again for the same issue and they go the big bucks. It would suprise me to see this coming up soon.
My step-mother is also an optometrist. When I asked her about it she said that is safe and would recommend to me or my father(her husband). So it seems it is far from being a universal opinion on whether it is a good or a bad thing.
I have considered it, considering without contacts I would probably qualify as being blind. I cannot even read a monitor without my face being with 5 or 6 inches away. For now I have decided it is too much money and not enough of a hassle to bother with. Maybe if I go somewhere were I cannot have easy access to contacts and solution regularly.
They are trying to crack down on abundant claims and too-technical jargon which they claim overworks the examiners, reduces the quality of the patent, and other things.
This is one of the big things I hate about the government and the law, they insist on keeping all this cavots from times based. Hello, the engilsh language has changed how about you change with them. If it is too-technical, reject it, tell them to rewrite it, too much jaragon, reject it and tell them to use some common english.
It would seem like common sense that if they required the patents to simplier to explain, then they can reduce the amount of work they do. Does this mean it is easy to explain complicated concepts in simple terms? No, but alot of technical jaragon is just wasted space trying to make something from little substanance.
Big business has this problem too, the difference is that business can decide it wants to work with a clean slate, the government can't/won't
This is just like Dungeon and Dragons, they said it contributed to murders, suicide, and increased violence.
Funny how an increase in violent videos managed to contribute to decreased violent crimes throughout the 90's. Oh, that does not count that was the improved economy, with a weak economy there is increase in crime. So what they need to do is outlaw the economy taking a downturn, because THAT will prevent violence...
Yeah and the Windows 98/ME Administrator account totally prevents this, right? The fact is, the IT staff had a problem, and they figure the easiest way to resolve the problem is to blame the students and tell them to do something that you want. It has nothing to do with which OS they are using, If there was a version of Windows XP+ out there they would be blaming Windows Xp for having a security hole and that students now have to have XP+ installed instead. It is typical MS thinking, upgrade so that your current problems will go away.