Engineers here will be SOL, but if the subsidiary is in another country you do not have to worry about being sued.
Hardly. And more to the point, if you try to import those infringing products you can still find yourself in court (not to mention with an injunction preventing you from selling anything.)
Really. This is a stupid story. You might as well ask why you can't convert your car into a spaceship.
No, that would actually make sense some day....
Do we really need to add the word "Relevant" in the line "News for Nerds" here? I thought it was fairly clear with the line "Stuff that Matters".
Parent is right here, this is a stupid story, mainly for the fact that the author acts like boinc, SETI, genome/folding@home, and many, many others have somehow fallen into a black hole that everyone forgot about. The concept of using CPU cycles in a massive parallel effort is hardly new. "harnessing the power"...sheesh, like once THIS project cracks 500,000 cores processing at once, a holodeck or time machine will magically appear...
Well. I don't know about a time machine. Those things are dangerous. But a holodeck now: if converting Wikipedia into a multiprocessor array would come up with a holodeck, I'd be all for it. Matter of fact, the number of Slashdotters who would immediately buy one is legion... they'd never, ever, have to leave their parent's basement and could have a girlfriend as well. Or a reasonable facsimile of same. Or many different reasonable facsimiles.
As a Canadian, I can tell you that unlike the US, cellphone coverage in Canada isn't universal.
As an American, I can tell you that unlike some other parts of the world, coverage in the United States isn't universal either. Granted, we've a lot of territory to cover, but there's also a lot of cherry-picking going on.
. I wonder whether the control-happy local franchises will do anything to prevent in-person fans creating and sharing such instant play-by-play accounts.
The SEC (American College Football) already frowns upon tweeting the games.
They can frown all they want. Let them start deploying cell phone jammers at stadiums, and then there will be trouble.
More than anything else, isn't that more of a statement of how weak Nokia's finances are?
Possibly. Not that it's relevant. It's more a statement that Apple's patent portfolio is full of hot air. If nothing else, the money spent on the lawyers (on both sides) would have been better invested in R&D to produce better products than in an ultimately fruitless (for Apple) dick-waving contest.
You don't know that, actually, do you?
Well, if you believe that Apple will simply absorb those costs without some consequences to their customers, I think you're being naive (at best.)
You can defend a bunch of litigious pricks if you like, that's your privilege. But all the hand-waiving in the world won't change the fact that bad patents are good only for the patent-holders, and not even for them in the long run. Face facts: our patent system wasn't intended by the Founders for the purpose which Apple and others have been using it, and that is the suppression of disruptive technological development. It's quite clear that the exact opposite result was desired (the Constitution says so, right there in cold print.) Granted, it's Congress that put us in this position, because a certain corrupt subset of Congress made critical (and, in my opinion, treasonous) changes to patent law. Nevertheless, I don't give Apple a pass on their behavior just because they make some nice products. A bad patent is a bad patent and should never have been granted in the first place.
Well, this is that patent. And Apple deserves every single year of their protection.
Why? The fact that you, or anyone else, likes the iPhone is not justification for a bad, overbroad patent. That actually hurts you, in terms of the slowed pace of progress, if you had the wit to see that.
Doesn't seem to be slowing Apple down...;-)
You don't know that. Actually, you do... Apple lost to Nokia in their long-running patent battle and is paying through the nose, so much money in fact that it's going to improve Nokia's bottom line. Patent wars go both ways. Who gets hurt in that? The consumer: in this case, the iPhone aficionado because he's going to be making up the difference.
For that type of thing you can never have enough memory and power.
The problem with that is that the interconnects are too slow. Distribute a brain over a planet and it's going to respond in geological time. Living neurons are slow as molasses compared to transistors, but that synaptic fuckton is packed into a couple dozen cubic inches... signals don't have to travel very far, and the level of interconnectivity is enormous. Spread that out to the point where lightspeed effects become significant, and your distributed brain isn't likely to be too useful.
The sooner they can get you talking, the sooner you might divulge something they can use. Even if they can't use it, they can ask you the same question again later and if your answer is not exactly the same then your story changed. Once your version can be called into question because
you are changing your story (lying), they win.
I hope this sends every other phone manufacturer back to the proverbial drawing board.
{sigh} I realize that you're a hopeless fanboy, but recognize that bad patents hurt everyone including your favorite company, Apple Computer. Your fundamental assumption seems to be that nobody else will ever innovate or patent anything significant in this market space. You're wrong, and if defective patents are allowed to stand Apple has just as much chance of being damaged by this as any current Apple competitor.
Well, this is that patent. And Apple deserves every single year of their protection.
Why? The fact that you, or anyone else, likes the iPhone is not justification for a bad, overbroad patent. That actually hurts you, in terms of the slowed pace of progress, if you had the wit to see that.
And only that high assuming that at least 1 in 100,000 judges are bat-shit insane.
Looking at the general ignorance of the technical world evinced by courts around the country in the RIAA copyright cases, I'm not sanguine about this one.
Yeah, but that doesn't really hold up in a patent lawsuit, as it's not an actual implementation of the idea. It's just a rendering. You'd have to show a device actually using it.
You just described most software patents: "not an actual implementation of an idea". We're patenting ideas, and frankly, if we're going to do that then Minority Report would do fine as prior art. If we're patenting actual products, that might be different. Then again, it might not.
Sorry, but allowing Apple the ability to stifle competition by suing anyone who makes a rival product, which would end the potential for anything BETTER being created, is not only stupid but backwards thinking of the worst kind.
I respectfully disagree, because as anyone knows, only Apple Computer Inc., helmed by the redoubtable Steven Jobs, is capable of such innovation, so in reality there would be no such competition to stifle. Besides, Apple is just too nice an organization and would never, ever, stoop to using a patent in such an offensive manner.
That was my impression of an Apple fanboy. How did I do?
Slashdot Mirror
PAGE LIVES!
Unless you're talking about Buzz, in which case it was a Page Fault.
Engineers here will be SOL, but if the subsidiary is in another country you do not have to worry about being sued.
Hardly. And more to the point, if you try to import those infringing products you can still find yourself in court (not to mention with an injunction preventing you from selling anything.)
way to go Uncle Fester.
I've always thought of Ballmer as more resembling a psychotic Peter Boyle (R.I.P.) That, or a hairless monkey on steroids.
Really. This is a stupid story. You might as well ask why you can't convert your car into a spaceship.
No, that would actually make sense some day....
Do we really need to add the word "Relevant" in the line "News for Nerds" here? I thought it was fairly clear with the line "Stuff that Matters".
Parent is right here, this is a stupid story, mainly for the fact that the author acts like boinc, SETI, genome/folding@home, and many, many others have somehow fallen into a black hole that everyone forgot about. The concept of using CPU cycles in a massive parallel effort is hardly new. "harnessing the power"...sheesh, like once THIS project cracks 500,000 cores processing at once, a holodeck or time machine will magically appear...
Well. I don't know about a time machine. Those things are dangerous. But a holodeck now: if converting Wikipedia into a multiprocessor array would come up with a holodeck, I'd be all for it. Matter of fact, the number of Slashdotters who would immediately buy one is legion ... they'd never, ever, have to leave their parent's basement and could have a girlfriend as well. Or a reasonable facsimile of same. Or many different reasonable facsimiles.
As a Canadian, I can tell you that unlike the US, cellphone coverage in Canada isn't universal.
As an American, I can tell you that unlike some other parts of the world, coverage in the United States isn't universal either. Granted, we've a lot of territory to cover, but there's also a lot of cherry-picking going on.
Yeah, should have double-checked that.
. I wonder whether the control-happy local franchises will do anything to prevent in-person fans creating and sharing such instant play-by-play accounts.
The SEC (American College Football) already frowns upon tweeting the games.
They can frown all they want. Let them start deploying cell phone jammers at stadiums, and then there will be trouble.
Why was this guy modded Troll? He makes some good points.
More than anything else, isn't that more of a statement of how weak Nokia's finances are?
Possibly. Not that it's relevant. It's more a statement that Apple's patent portfolio is full of hot air. If nothing else, the money spent on the lawyers (on both sides) would have been better invested in R&D to produce better products than in an ultimately fruitless (for Apple) dick-waving contest.
You don't know that, actually, do you?
Well, if you believe that Apple will simply absorb those costs without some consequences to their customers, I think you're being naive (at best.)
You can defend a bunch of litigious pricks if you like, that's your privilege. But all the hand-waiving in the world won't change the fact that bad patents are good only for the patent-holders, and not even for them in the long run. Face facts: our patent system wasn't intended by the Founders for the purpose which Apple and others have been using it, and that is the suppression of disruptive technological development. It's quite clear that the exact opposite result was desired (the Constitution says so, right there in cold print.) Granted, it's Congress that put us in this position, because a certain corrupt subset of Congress made critical (and, in my opinion, treasonous) changes to patent law. Nevertheless, I don't give Apple a pass on their behavior just because they make some nice products. A bad patent is a bad patent and should never have been granted in the first place.
Well, this is that patent. And Apple deserves every single year of their protection.
Why? The fact that you, or anyone else, likes the iPhone is not justification for a bad, overbroad patent. That actually hurts you, in terms of the slowed pace of progress, if you had the wit to see that.
Doesn't seem to be slowing Apple down... ;-)
You don't know that. Actually, you do ... Apple lost to Nokia in their long-running patent battle and is paying through the nose, so much money in fact that it's going to improve Nokia's bottom line. Patent wars go both ways. Who gets hurt in that? The consumer: in this case, the iPhone aficionado because he's going to be making up the difference.
For that type of thing you can never have enough memory and power.
The problem with that is that the interconnects are too slow. Distribute a brain over a planet and it's going to respond in geological time. Living neurons are slow as molasses compared to transistors, but that synaptic fuckton is packed into a couple dozen cubic inches ... signals don't have to travel very far, and the level of interconnectivity is enormous. Spread that out to the point where lightspeed effects become significant, and your distributed brain isn't likely to be too useful.
Apologies to Thomas J. Ryan.
While Wikipedia's visitors read Wikepedia's entries, the CPUs of their computers are almost idle. What make you think that this is the case?
Yes, that does seem rather presumptuous. Maybe not entirely inaccurate, but presumptuous.
So I get the value of "LET THERE BE LIGHT!" is 42?
Nope. 5x9 is 42.
"what kind of problems would you want it chugging away at?"
Well obviously the Answer to Life, the Universe and Everything
How about, "How do we make wikipedia accurate and reliable?"
all that guru meditation is bound to bring enlightenment 0.18
Nah. Too many errors. I reverted to 0.17.
"Clusterfuck of little tiny fiefdoms." That has to be the best description of wikipedia that I've ever heard.
Really. This is a stupid story. You might as well ask why you can't convert your car into a spaceship.
Of course, you're assuming the people who run lulzsec are actually intelligent. That has yet to be proven.
The sooner they can get you talking, the sooner you might divulge something they can use. Even if they can't use it, they can ask you the same question again later and if your answer is not exactly the same then your story changed. Once your version can be called into question because you are changing your story (lying), they win.
Four words: I want a lawyer.
I hope this sends every other phone manufacturer back to the proverbial drawing board.
{sigh} I realize that you're a hopeless fanboy, but recognize that bad patents hurt everyone including your favorite company, Apple Computer. Your fundamental assumption seems to be that nobody else will ever innovate or patent anything significant in this market space. You're wrong, and if defective patents are allowed to stand Apple has just as much chance of being damaged by this as any current Apple competitor.
Courts don't do things in the public interest, that's not what they're there for. Courts dispense justice
Not even that much. Courts are there to maintain social control and not much else. Any justice that results is almost artifactual sometimes.
Well, this is that patent. And Apple deserves every single year of their protection.
Why? The fact that you, or anyone else, likes the iPhone is not justification for a bad, overbroad patent. That actually hurts you, in terms of the slowed pace of progress, if you had the wit to see that.
And only that high assuming that at least 1 in 100,000 judges are bat-shit insane.
Looking at the general ignorance of the technical world evinced by courts around the country in the RIAA copyright cases, I'm not sanguine about this one.
Yeah, but that doesn't really hold up in a patent lawsuit, as it's not an actual implementation of the idea. It's just a rendering. You'd have to show a device actually using it.
You just described most software patents: "not an actual implementation of an idea". We're patenting ideas, and frankly, if we're going to do that then Minority Report would do fine as prior art. If we're patenting actual products, that might be different. Then again, it might not.
Sorry, but allowing Apple the ability to stifle competition by suing anyone who makes a rival product, which would end the potential for anything BETTER being created, is not only stupid but backwards thinking of the worst kind.
I respectfully disagree, because as anyone knows, only Apple Computer Inc., helmed by the redoubtable Steven Jobs, is capable of such innovation, so in reality there would be no such competition to stifle. Besides, Apple is just too nice an organization and would never, ever, stoop to using a patent in such an offensive manner.
That was my impression of an Apple fanboy. How did I do?