As long as you trim off any excess leaves and whatnot, you can patent a tree branch that occurs in a certain place in all trees. Especially if you have a lucrative diagnostic kit that will support lots of expensive litigation.
Hooray! Now I can patent a gene that arose spontaneously in nature because I invented a detection kit based on standard published techniques I learned in grad school! Now if I could only patent an entire friggin' human chromosome... But which one, which one would be best...
I agree with you, I meant this specific case. Although given Samsung's recent arguments, invalidating the whole thing should be on the table. USPTO needs to 1) process claims much faster, 2) reject all but a precious few that actually describe specific, narrowly defined original inventions. The narrower and more specific, the better. It might be hard to create and maintain the guidelines, though. Amazon's one button buy patent sounds as if any book on HTML would be prior art, but how do you make such things into policy as technologies appear and become widely disseminated?
the case has a set number of hours which are already wearing quite thin
You're right. It is a misuse in reference to a fixed interval that is elapsing. It would be correct if she was granting additional allotments of time, but was losing the inclination to continue doing so. Her patience is wearing thin though, and I certainly don't blame her. She should squeeze both parties' balls even harder.
That's what I think, but some folks will doggedly try to make the fantasy come true anyway. If it ever happens at all, I can't see it for several decades. The fuel issue is even more limiting than the safety issue, and I don't see the automation being up to par for quite a while. Flying a drone straight and level in a sparsely populated airspace is a far cry from putting a freeway full of cars in the air, with everyone in them hysterically hurrying to their destinations. Just the pick-up and BMW drivers alone would cause vast carnage.
Flying cars are just a childish baby-boomer dream from the 1950s that somehow refuses to go away. Between safety and fuel economy concerns, it's hard to understand why people keep insisting on it. OK, OK, I get it. It seems like it would be really cool. At least it does if you shut your eyes really tight and wish really, really hard.
What the other poster was implying is that it can't happen that way. Holding your arm up constantly to use your computer is the express lane to carpal tunnel syndrome and all sorts of other repetitive motion injuries. It is a stupid gimmick, plain and simple.
it also makes it more likely that administrators around the world are less apt to adopt Windows 8 quickly
No sane administrator has ever quickly adopted any Windows version.
Sure, undoubtedly some third party will create a drop-in shell replacement eventually. That's been done in past versions and will likely be done again for Windows 8. For a home user, it's an acceptable path.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know what that is. You mean there's something like Gnome, KDE, xfce, etc. on Windows? Easy for home users to obtain and use? Citation needed.
If you're an engineer of any kind (including software), then guess what? You need math. Maybe a lot, or maybe a little (and it depends what you mean by "math"), but chances are the more math you can handle the better your work will be.
However, that wasn't the question, it was in effect "how much math should the average person be forced to learn in school?" This touches upon the current fad of piling on more work, more STEM, making younger kids learn what their forebears learned at later ages, and insisting that everybody has to go to college. Algebra in middle school? Sounds like a great plan, but in practice it is utterly moronic and self-destructive. Much of the curricula, workload, "standards," and homework are there not so that kids learn more or become better citizens, but to con parents into believing that their kids are in a great school and have a shining academic future. It's bullshit. Well below half of kids who exit middle school successfully graduate from a four year college program (you'll have to look it up yourself), and it's worth asking what happens to those who actually made it a couple of years after graduation. Let's not even talk about the cost, which amounts to a colossal fine to be paid by those who dare to pursue higher education (unlike in most other societies).
We insist on living in a fantasy world. Who needs manufacturing? We're in a {knowledge | service | innovation | blah blah blah}-based economy! If you don't go to college, you're on your own and nobody gives a shit about you, and you're likely condemned to a low wage forever. If your personality doesn't fit into the narrow demands of the school curriculum, then you must have some phantom mental illness and need to be medicated. Obviously it can't possibly be that the educational system is deeply flawed. If some vastly unhealthy diet is heavily promoted in commercial pop-culture venues and easily available at every single supermarket on the globe, then it must be good! Diabetes, heart-disease, obesity, lung cancer, etc. should be treated with pills that you need to take for the rest of your life, not by avoiding junk food, sugary beverages, smoking, etc. Try suggesting to people that they should only drink sweet soft drinks a few times a month. You yourself probably think it's a crazy suggestion. Next step: shift the discussion of the explosive growth of health care costs to hot-button political controversy where it will languish forever and never be solved.
Believe it or not, all of these are consequences of a moronic, self-destructive educational system that successfully serves a small fraction of the population. What do people learn in school? To feed themselves in a healthy sustainable way? To earn a decent living? To be skeptical of whacko religious, political, and cultural figures and doctrines? To cultivate their minds and bodies to be wiser and more satisfied with life? To build an ever improving society and culture? To help make sure that this lifetime is as good as it possibly can be for themselves, their fellow citizens, and for everyone else on earth? Or do those things sound utterly idiotic and at odds with real life and the education we all end up with?
It looks like there are a few HFT types on this thread. For mere mortals with no access to this stuff, what aspects of the equities markets are left uncovered and exploitable as traders move towards these new algorithmic tools? What kinds of lucrative medium term trades are made available (if any) by this that were previously big centers of attention but no longer?
1) History shows that such a system will be applied as widely and as intensely as possible as long as someone is making money from it
2) Asimov's laws of robotics are and have always been ludicrous. Intelligent robots will never be developed where such rules can be reliably enforced by the robot itself. It just doesn't work that way.
A much more versatile and generalizable title would be "[% legislative_chamber %] [% legislation_name %] Stalled By Ridiculous Amendments." Used as an HTML template, it would be almost universally applicable around the world.
I see your point, but throughout human history motivated individuals have been able to create most Bad objects they desired. Once again, it isn't so much a political change but an economic one due to a new sophisticated technology that significantly increases the subset of objects within reach of average citizens. The accessible subset from Anything is now much larger. Good-ness and Bad-ness are secondary.
Also, I object to the claim that it is moralists that define what we can and cannot buy without restriction. It is simple-minded to claim that safety regulations on drugs, food, consumer items, weapons, etc. are based solely on moral grounds or the equally simplistic criteria of liberal vs. conservative or libertarian vs whatever the counterpart to libertarianism might be. It is a perfectly reasonable expectation that products should be demonstrably what they claim to be, that items to be used by children not be overtly dangerous, that products for human consumption be demonstrably non-toxic, that the risks of medication be as clearly understood as possible, that drugs should not be sold for arbitrary purposes (that would be mere charlatanism and fraud), that extremely dangerous weapons (above and beyond reasonable personal protection, hunting, and sport) require some sort of licensing and tracking process, and many other such expectations. Unfortunately, our political and legal systems have been hijacked by mobsters.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as you trim off any excess leaves and whatnot, you can patent a tree branch that occurs in a certain place in all trees. Especially if you have a lucrative diagnostic kit that will support lots of expensive litigation.
Ha! Suckers.
Patenting a gene because you made a detection kit for it is like invading Iraq because Saudis blew up some of your buildings.
Oops! Sorry...
Hooray! Now I can patent a gene that arose spontaneously in nature because I invented a detection kit based on standard published techniques I learned in grad school! Now if I could only patent an entire friggin' human chromosome... But which one, which one would be best...
Just try deliberately offending a US judge during a trial in which you are a litigant. Go on. I dare you. I double dare you.
I agree with you, I meant this specific case. Although given Samsung's recent arguments, invalidating the whole thing should be on the table. USPTO needs to 1) process claims much faster, 2) reject all but a precious few that actually describe specific, narrowly defined original inventions. The narrower and more specific, the better. It might be hard to create and maintain the guidelines, though. Amazon's one button buy patent sounds as if any book on HTML would be prior art, but how do you make such things into policy as technologies appear and become widely disseminated?
the case has a set number of hours which are already wearing quite thin
You're right. It is a misuse in reference to a fixed interval that is elapsing. It would be correct if she was granting additional allotments of time, but was losing the inclination to continue doing so. Her patience is wearing thin though, and I certainly don't blame her. She should squeeze both parties' balls even harder.
IMHO Compelling both parties to reach a settlement as soon as possible is probably best for everyone.
You're probably right, or so I hope. Apple was smoking crack to file this case at all. "Rectangular design with rounded corners" indeed.
That's what I think, but some folks will doggedly try to make the fantasy come true anyway. If it ever happens at all, I can't see it for several decades. The fuel issue is even more limiting than the safety issue, and I don't see the automation being up to par for quite a while. Flying a drone straight and level in a sparsely populated airspace is a far cry from putting a freeway full of cars in the air, with everyone in them hysterically hurrying to their destinations. Just the pick-up and BMW drivers alone would cause vast carnage.
The only beneficiaries would be proctologists.
Flying cars are just a childish baby-boomer dream from the 1950s that somehow refuses to go away. Between safety and fuel economy concerns, it's hard to understand why people keep insisting on it. OK, OK, I get it. It seems like it would be really cool. At least it does if you shut your eyes really tight and wish really, really hard.
What the other poster was implying is that it can't happen that way. Holding your arm up constantly to use your computer is the express lane to carpal tunnel syndrome and all sorts of other repetitive motion injuries. It is a stupid gimmick, plain and simple.
There are probably millions of such analogies. Get ready to read them by the dozen in the not too distant future.
it also makes it more likely that administrators around the world are less apt to adopt Windows 8 quickly
No sane administrator has ever quickly adopted any Windows version.
Sure, undoubtedly some third party will create a drop-in shell replacement eventually. That's been done in past versions and will likely be done again for Windows 8. For a home user, it's an acceptable path.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know what that is. You mean there's something like Gnome, KDE, xfce, etc. on Windows? Easy for home users to obtain and use? Citation needed.
Welcome, Comrades!, Welcome to the Glorious Union of Soviet Corporatist Republics!
Thanks! Please pass it on if you can. We could use the traffic.
Why would anyone want to approach a burning spacecraft? Let the fuel burn out, then extinguish the flames of what's left for disposal.
If you're an engineer of any kind (including software), then guess what? You need math. Maybe a lot, or maybe a little (and it depends what you mean by "math"), but chances are the more math you can handle the better your work will be.
However, that wasn't the question, it was in effect "how much math should the average person be forced to learn in school?" This touches upon the current fad of piling on more work, more STEM, making younger kids learn what their forebears learned at later ages, and insisting that everybody has to go to college. Algebra in middle school? Sounds like a great plan, but in practice it is utterly moronic and self-destructive. Much of the curricula, workload, "standards," and homework are there not so that kids learn more or become better citizens, but to con parents into believing that their kids are in a great school and have a shining academic future. It's bullshit. Well below half of kids who exit middle school successfully graduate from a four year college program (you'll have to look it up yourself), and it's worth asking what happens to those who actually made it a couple of years after graduation. Let's not even talk about the cost, which amounts to a colossal fine to be paid by those who dare to pursue higher education (unlike in most other societies).
We insist on living in a fantasy world. Who needs manufacturing? We're in a {knowledge | service | innovation | blah blah blah}-based economy! If you don't go to college, you're on your own and nobody gives a shit about you, and you're likely condemned to a low wage forever. If your personality doesn't fit into the narrow demands of the school curriculum, then you must have some phantom mental illness and need to be medicated. Obviously it can't possibly be that the educational system is deeply flawed. If some vastly unhealthy diet is heavily promoted in commercial pop-culture venues and easily available at every single supermarket on the globe, then it must be good! Diabetes, heart-disease, obesity, lung cancer, etc. should be treated with pills that you need to take for the rest of your life, not by avoiding junk food, sugary beverages, smoking, etc. Try suggesting to people that they should only drink sweet soft drinks a few times a month. You yourself probably think it's a crazy suggestion. Next step: shift the discussion of the explosive growth of health care costs to hot-button political controversy where it will languish forever and never be solved.
Believe it or not, all of these are consequences of a moronic, self-destructive educational system that successfully serves a small fraction of the population. What do people learn in school? To feed themselves in a healthy sustainable way? To earn a decent living? To be skeptical of whacko religious, political, and cultural figures and doctrines? To cultivate their minds and bodies to be wiser and more satisfied with life? To build an ever improving society and culture? To help make sure that this lifetime is as good as it possibly can be for themselves, their fellow citizens, and for everyone else on earth? Or do those things sound utterly idiotic and at odds with real life and the education we all end up with?
It looks like there are a few HFT types on this thread. For mere mortals with no access to this stuff, what aspects of the equities markets are left uncovered and exploitable as traders move towards these new algorithmic tools? What kinds of lucrative medium term trades are made available (if any) by this that were previously big centers of attention but no longer?
1) History shows that such a system will be applied as widely and as intensely as possible as long as someone is making money from it
2) Asimov's laws of robotics are and have always been ludicrous. Intelligent robots will never be developed where such rules can be reliably enforced by the robot itself. It just doesn't work that way.
... or a violin
Yes, but be vehwy vehwy quiet about it.
A much more versatile and generalizable title would be "[% legislative_chamber %] [% legislation_name %] Stalled By Ridiculous Amendments." Used as an HTML template, it would be almost universally applicable around the world.
I see your point, but throughout human history motivated individuals have been able to create most Bad objects they desired. Once again, it isn't so much a political change but an economic one due to a new sophisticated technology that significantly increases the subset of objects within reach of average citizens. The accessible subset from Anything is now much larger. Good-ness and Bad-ness are secondary.
Also, I object to the claim that it is moralists that define what we can and cannot buy without restriction. It is simple-minded to claim that safety regulations on drugs, food, consumer items, weapons, etc. are based solely on moral grounds or the equally simplistic criteria of liberal vs. conservative or libertarian vs whatever the counterpart to libertarianism might be. It is a perfectly reasonable expectation that products should be demonstrably what they claim to be, that items to be used by children not be overtly dangerous, that products for human consumption be demonstrably non-toxic, that the risks of medication be as clearly understood as possible, that drugs should not be sold for arbitrary purposes (that would be mere charlatanism and fraud), that extremely dangerous weapons (above and beyond reasonable personal protection, hunting, and sport) require some sort of licensing and tracking process, and many other such expectations. Unfortunately, our political and legal systems have been hijacked by mobsters.