Yeah, please can some expert step forward and explain this to us? I share the same gut feeling that this is somehow wrong and an abuse of the system.
Is it because it's actually gene sequences that are being reversed engineered and patented, rather than the entire genome being patented in one fell swoop?
"You can't patent a gene sequence just because you know it," he pointed out. "The sequence has to be novel, useful, and you have to teach somebody how to use it. Those patents will always be available." --William Haseltine, president of Human Genome Sciences
Another interesting tidbit from the article:
"No other sector of the economy depends as much on strong patent protection or
on the flow of information from academic science as pharmaceuticals and biotechnology," the authors wrote. [Refering to Dr. Robert Cook-Deegan, director of the National Cancer Policy Board and Stephen McCormack, president and CEO of AlleCure]
How I wish this would settle once and for all the false distinction that gets made by repeatedly by some here and elsewhere.
I sometimes wonder if this false distinction isn't indoctrinated by those in the Republican party that hate to be associated with Democrats in any way.
You're forgetting the initial phase of the war (or arguably, the second phase) which started in September of 1945 (Truman was the American President at the time) and ended with the French defeat and withdrawal in March of 1954 (Eisenhower). The United States was very much involved in support for the French during the first phase, and commited to help South Viet Nam at the time of the 1954 Geneva Accords.
So, you're both right. The French were the primary adversaries pre-1954, but the United States has been involved since WW2. (A side note: The US supported Ho Chi Minh's struggle against the Japanese occupation of Indochina during WW2).
You're going to want a decent microphone, and as far as I can tell, most of the cheap consumer grade recorders don't have a decent mic. Look for something with either a decent mic or with XLR input and provide your own mic.
Yes, you got carried away, but you won the argument and made me change my mind. Not an easy thing to do, but not impossible, either.
The patent system rewards dishonesty and at this point in time actively discourages what it was implemented to encourage. We already knew this, but I'm still glad I challenged you, as you've given me a clearer understanding of the dishonesty by calling it for what it is, namely lying.
Your example is a ridiculous analogy. A better analogy would if someone called something a transportation system, which is about as general and open ended as "an online community website designed for friends". A transportation system could be a train, a car, a plane, a boat, i.e., many things. It could refer to roadways or railways or sea routes. Likewise "an online community website designed for friends" can refer to many things, not just blogs.
So, really, I think that your reading specificity into a generalized statement is what is odd. You seem to be arguing that all online communities are blogs. Is Usenet a blog? Was the WeLL a blog? I suppose you could argue that they were, but that no one had come up with the catchy name of blog until now.
Re:Trained?
on
We the Media
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Writing is a skill, and like any skill can be learned. If one learns the skill well enough and uses that skill, one may be said to practice good writing.
However, just because one has undergone training in the skill of writing does not make one a good writer. Use of any skill usually takes practice, and masters of a skill usually have practiced carefully and conscientiously to reach that level of mastery. Of course, there are exceptions: those who are able to write well without much practice and those who will never be able to write well despite much training.
My guess is that these two extremes are explained by a greater or lesser ability to focus and organize one's thoughts.
Re:Read more about it!
on
We the Media
·
· Score: 1
Anyway, I think you'll find that once you drop the "angry young man" shtick, a lot of the personal issues you're having will just fade. Good luck to you! You've got the intelligence to be much more interesting, and as you mature, you will be.
And you're probably right about Rachel (See item entitled "bummer"). It's a pity, but you're smart to be steering clear, at least right now.
What is your malfunction? I made no assumptions, I merely pointed out that you were a little over the top with your attacks as well as pointing out that judging from Orkut's own website, Orkut is billing itself as a Social Network and not as a blog.
I'm going to ASSume that you don't normally act like this, and some other personal issue of yours is intruding itself into the discussion. This is what we call an unsafe assumption, since it has no facts to back it up (indeed, the facts point otherwise). Satoshi made an assumption based on facts available on the Orkut website.
If you prefer a product that is different from the product I like, clearly you are a misguided zealot! Now, while we wait for the Grand Inquisitor to arrive, why don't we relax and have a nice Koolaid. ..
Well, since it's invitation only. . . how is anyone without an invite supposed to know? Orkut's about page makes NO mention of a blogging feature. It specifically states that it is "an online community website designed for friends" and a "social network".
Satoshi doesn't seem to be making blanket assumptions, but provisional ones that could be based on information available on the Orkut website. (You'll have to ask him where he got his information.)
Cool your jets, big boy. Nobody has been pissing in your cornflakes, at least not here.
Spike Lee will be introducing mobile blogging for the Afro-American community (in Japan). He is calling this new service "Mo Better Blogging".
What next, you ask? Is Spike Lee the only movie director to get involved in this development? The answer is no, friends. Spike Jonz will be introducing a service in Japan called "Blogging John Malkovich".
You're intentionally misreading a verb clause as a noun. Let me explain what the strategy of counter-patenting is: When a competitor holds a patent to a technology you want to use or are using, you patent a technology that the competitor wants to use or is using. Then, when you get a cease-and-desist from them, you return the favor. Then you settle, with happy cross-licensing of patented technology all around.
I shouldn't have to explain this as this was basically already stated. You seem to be willfully ignoring the established meaning.
No where in the strategy is their a need to lie about knowing anything. You are the one that is inserting the lying as strategy meme. It's not inherently a part of the originally mentioned meme.
The whole point of the counter-patent strategy is analagous to the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) of the cold war. Because all these companies have huge patent portfolios (nuclear weapon stockpiles), no company will risk a nuclear war (patent litigation) that would result in complete destruction. The flaw with this strategy is just because it seemingly worked with nuclear weapons and world politics doesn't mean it will work with technology. Still, lying is irrellevant to the strategy.
And of course the patent system is broken. You're not supporting your point by bringing that up. I'm not sure why you have this obsession with lying, but I find it ironic that you are willing to distort the facts to support your argument.
From a purely financial standpoint, SCOX is in a better position today than it was before it undertook it's current course. The stockprice, despite taking a beating, is still higher than it was before Darl took the helm. The company is flush with cash from the PIPE deals.
SCOX was dying. It's still dying, but it's managed to buy some time through some pretty outrageous maneuvers and complete loss of credibility. It's also made some insiders a lot of money.
The only way SCOX could possibly regain any credibility would be if they replaced their entire upper management and then dropped or settled their law suits. I say possibly, because even if they did these things, I doubt it would be enough. Oh, they'd still need a viable strategy going forward.
I'm the CTO of a Fortune 500 company that is considering moving to tinfoil hats. Is this $699.00 on a per CPU basis (each CPU can wear as many tinfoil hats as it wants?) or a company wide basis (for $699.00, all my CPUs can wear as many tinfoil hats as they want?)?
We're looking at rolling out a test deployment in Boca Raton, although we're considering other areas that might have a lower incidence of lightning.
Yeah, I pretty much agree with a lot of your criticisms of Groklaw and PJ. Which is why I no longer read or post to the comments there. I had a comment deleted that was critical of the hyperbolic writing style that is often (almost always) in evidence at Groklaw. It's too bad, because I did find some real value in some of the comments that get posted by informed people. This depsite the overwhelming noise of uninformed outrage in the comments (which is not that different than here, come to think of it.)
When a community is closed to internal criticism, I don't want to be part of that community. When a community leader actively censors valid criticism, I'm not going to follow that leader. They've shown themselves to be unworthy of that sort of trust.
I still read the news items over at Groklaw, and I've learned to not wince when Pam's histrionic commentary goes over the top. But I no longer participate there.
But it can take a lot of money to invalidate them in court, thus this insurance. If you're not in a position to need this insurance, get the poor man's insurance by donating to the EFF or to PubPat.
This insurance product is not intended for you. It is for larger companies intending to deploy or develop linux or other OSS solutions.
Eolas went for the deepest pocket. There are also indications that they went after MS because of personal reasons. If you have enough money, you as a linux user could be a target, potentially.
Would this insurance have been useful to a company like Autozone?
Slashdot Mirror
Let me guess. . . you and the other non-tippers also object to being called Mr. Pink. You'd rather be called Mr. Purple, right?
Well, Mr. Purple is some other guy on some other website.
Damn, Lawrence Tierney was great in that movie.
Is it because it's actually gene sequences that are being reversed engineered and patented, rather than the entire genome being patented in one fell swoop?
Another DNA patent story on wired sheds a little light:
Another interesting tidbit from the article:
[Emphasis mine]
Yeah, our federal representatives did a great job of protecting the Japanese-American minority here in California during WW2.
Executive Order 9066
Fortunately for the Muslim Americans, they don't own large tracts of prime Californian farmland. During WW2, 200,000 acres of farmland were confiscated from Japanese Americans or sold under duress by the Farm Security Administration. If Muslim Americans had comparable real estate holdings, you can bet they'd be relieved of them "for strategic purposes" and to get them "out of harm's way".
has beautiful, intelligent daughters
What do you have to be against the twins, just because they're not that smart. Look at the genetics they were given.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
How I wish this would settle once and for all the false distinction that gets made by repeatedly by some here and elsewhere.
I sometimes wonder if this false distinction isn't indoctrinated by those in the Republican party that hate to be associated with Democrats in any way.
You're forgetting the initial phase of the war (or arguably, the second phase) which started in September of 1945 (Truman was the American President at the time) and ended with the French defeat and withdrawal in March of 1954 (Eisenhower). The United States was very much involved in support for the French during the first phase, and commited to help South Viet Nam at the time of the 1954 Geneva Accords.
So, you're both right. The French were the primary adversaries pre-1954, but the United States has been involved since WW2. (A side note: The US supported Ho Chi Minh's struggle against the Japanese occupation of Indochina during WW2).
You're going to want a decent microphone, and as far as I can tell, most of the cheap consumer grade recorders don't have a decent mic. Look for something with either a decent mic or with XLR input and provide your own mic.
Yes, you got carried away, but you won the argument and made me change my mind. Not an easy thing to do, but not impossible, either.
The patent system rewards dishonesty and at this point in time actively discourages what it was implemented to encourage. We already knew this, but I'm still glad I challenged you, as you've given me a clearer understanding of the dishonesty by calling it for what it is, namely lying.
Your example is a ridiculous analogy. A better analogy would if someone called something a transportation system, which is about as general and open ended as "an online community website designed for friends". A transportation system could be a train, a car, a plane, a boat, i.e., many things. It could refer to roadways or railways or sea routes. Likewise "an online community website designed for friends" can refer to many things, not just blogs.
So, really, I think that your reading specificity into a generalized statement is what is odd. You seem to be arguing that all online communities are blogs. Is Usenet a blog? Was the WeLL a blog? I suppose you could argue that they were, but that no one had come up with the catchy name of blog until now.
Writing is a skill, and like any skill can be learned. If one learns the skill well enough and uses that skill, one may be said to practice good writing.
However, just because one has undergone training in the skill of writing does not make one a good writer. Use of any skill usually takes practice, and masters of a skill usually have practiced carefully and conscientiously to reach that level of mastery. Of course, there are exceptions: those who are able to write well without much practice and those who will never be able to write well despite much training.
My guess is that these two extremes are explained by a greater or lesser ability to focus and organize one's thoughts.
50% Funny
30% Troll
20% Insightful
And part of this balanced breakfast
No, I better withdraw that assumption. Based on what I read on your website, you're normally abrasive. And such a nice looking young man, too.
Anyway, I think you'll find that once you drop the "angry young man" shtick, a lot of the personal issues you're having will just fade. Good luck to you! You've got the intelligence to be much more interesting, and as you mature, you will be.
And you're probably right about Rachel (See item entitled "bummer"). It's a pity, but you're smart to be steering clear, at least right now.
What is your malfunction? I made no assumptions, I merely pointed out that you were a little over the top with your attacks as well as pointing out that judging from Orkut's own website, Orkut is billing itself as a Social Network and not as a blog.
I'm going to ASSume that you don't normally act like this, and some other personal issue of yours is intruding itself into the discussion. This is what we call an unsafe assumption, since it has no facts to back it up (indeed, the facts point otherwise). Satoshi made an assumption based on facts available on the Orkut website.
If you prefer a product that is different from the product I like, clearly you are a misguided zealot! Now, while we wait for the Grand Inquisitor to arrive, why don't we relax and have a nice Koolaid. . .
Just kidding. Except about the Koolaid part.
Well, since it's invitation only. . . how is anyone without an invite supposed to know? Orkut's about page makes NO mention of a blogging feature. It specifically states that it is "an online community website designed for friends" and a "social network".
Satoshi doesn't seem to be making blanket assumptions, but provisional ones that could be based on information available on the Orkut website. (You'll have to ask him where he got his information.)
Cool your jets, big boy. Nobody has been pissing in your cornflakes, at least not here.
Nkd Nat port cvrd n ht grts
n jpn
(3 comments)
Spike Lee will be introducing mobile blogging for the Afro-American community (in Japan). He is calling this new service "Mo Better Blogging".
What next, you ask? Is Spike Lee the only movie director to get involved in this development? The answer is no, friends. Spike Jonz will be introducing a service in Japan called "Blogging John Malkovich".
You're intentionally misreading a verb clause as a noun. Let me explain what the strategy of counter-patenting is: When a competitor holds a patent to a technology you want to use or are using, you patent a technology that the competitor wants to use or is using. Then, when you get a cease-and-desist from them, you return the favor. Then you settle, with happy cross-licensing of patented technology all around.
I shouldn't have to explain this as this was basically already stated. You seem to be willfully ignoring the established meaning.
No where in the strategy is their a need to lie about knowing anything. You are the one that is inserting the lying as strategy meme. It's not inherently a part of the originally mentioned meme.
The whole point of the counter-patent strategy is analagous to the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) of the cold war. Because all these companies have huge patent portfolios (nuclear weapon stockpiles), no company will risk a nuclear war (patent litigation) that would result in complete destruction. The flaw with this strategy is just because it seemingly worked with nuclear weapons and world politics doesn't mean it will work with technology. Still, lying is irrellevant to the strategy.
And of course the patent system is broken. You're not supporting your point by bringing that up. I'm not sure why you have this obsession with lying, but I find it ironic that you are willing to distort the facts to support your argument.
From a purely financial standpoint, SCOX is in a better position today than it was before it undertook it's current course. The stockprice, despite taking a beating, is still higher than it was before Darl took the helm. The company is flush with cash from the PIPE deals.
SCOX was dying. It's still dying, but it's managed to buy some time through some pretty outrageous maneuvers and complete loss of credibility. It's also made some insiders a lot of money.
The only way SCOX could possibly regain any credibility would be if they replaced their entire upper management and then dropped or settled their law suits. I say possibly, because even if they did these things, I doubt it would be enough. Oh, they'd still need a viable strategy going forward.
Mcbride's Thousand Year Reich is nearly at an end.
Litigators, litigators, litigators!
I. Love. This. Company!
Yeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaoooow!
I think Codeweavers is working on BonziBuddy.
I'm the CTO of a Fortune 500 company that is considering moving to tinfoil hats. Is this $699.00 on a per CPU basis (each CPU can wear as many tinfoil hats as it wants?) or a company wide basis (for $699.00, all my CPUs can wear as many tinfoil hats as they want?)?
We're looking at rolling out a test deployment in Boca Raton, although we're considering other areas that might have a lower incidence of lightning.
Yeah, I pretty much agree with a lot of your criticisms of Groklaw and PJ. Which is why I no longer read or post to the comments there. I had a comment deleted that was critical of the hyperbolic writing style that is often (almost always) in evidence at Groklaw. It's too bad, because I did find some real value in some of the comments that get posted by informed people. This depsite the overwhelming noise of uninformed outrage in the comments (which is not that different than here, come to think of it.)
When a community is closed to internal criticism, I don't want to be part of that community. When a community leader actively censors valid criticism, I'm not going to follow that leader. They've shown themselves to be unworthy of that sort of trust.
I still read the news items over at Groklaw, and I've learned to not wince when Pam's histrionic commentary goes over the top. But I no longer participate there.
But it can take a lot of money to invalidate them in court, thus this insurance. If you're not in a position to need this insurance, get the poor man's insurance by donating to the EFF or to PubPat.
This insurance product is not intended for you. It is for larger companies intending to deploy or develop linux or other OSS solutions.
Eolas went for the deepest pocket. There are also indications that they went after MS because of personal reasons. If you have enough money, you as a linux user could be a target, potentially.
Would this insurance have been useful to a company like Autozone?