I can't imagine this being entirely safe. What if someone points it where it rolls out into the middle of a busy intersection, and somebody slams on their brakes or swerves to avoid it, causing an accident or hitting a pedestrian?
By this logic, people should never take their children outdoors ever.
The US doesn't field many, if any, megaton warheads anymore. I'm not sure how the Russians are doing on this, but I would guess that most of their reductions have been of the highest-yield weapons as well.
The US is a first-to-invent country (the only one in the world, actually). In the US, if two pending applications claim the same stuff, an interference proceeding is held to determine who reduced the invention to practice first and/or who had a complete conception of the entire claimed invention first combined with due diligence thereafter in reducing the invention to practice.
If you invent something without filing for a patent on it, and then I invent it independently but I do patent it, then if I sue you for infringement, your defense could be that you were using the invention in the US more than a year before my filing date, or (as a more difficult approach) you could prove that I didn't actually invent it first.
Not necessarily. The Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences has cited Wikipedia several times. What's more, the fact that Wikipedia keeps a history allows examiners to go back to pick up the version of the page that actually counts as prior art.
The Wayback Machine on the Internet Archive is another good tool that examiners can use. It's especially good for when an applicant or company blabs about their stuff on their website and then tries to file a patent on it more than a year later.
However, when it comes to using Wikipedia as a place to ensconce your public domain invention, it's probably not the best tool for that. Wikipedia gets used a lot when an examiner doesn't understand something, but most patent applications are close enough to the bleeding edge that Wikipedia's not that great for anything but knocking out the basics or just learning unfamiliar terminology.
As for Google, more and more examiners use Google these days, but it pales in comparison to the search tools that examiners have for searching through patents, published applications, statutory invention registrations, and the abstracts of published journal articles and conference proceedings.
Ultimately, if you really really want an invention put into the public domain and don't mind the cost, a statutory invention registration is how to do it. It's cheaper than a patent application because there's no search fee involved, but there is still a fee for publication and classification. I don't know what the fee total is, but it's apparently at least $920, and you may need the assistance or advice of an attorney to help you get it in the proper form (it should look more or less like a patent application).
Another way to go about this is to forward the piece of prior art to the attorney and/or the applicant. They are required by law to disclose things they know about that are material to patentability (see 37 CFR 1.56). Failure to fulfill the duty to disclose can be grounds for invalidation of a patent. If you send it through some form of return-receipt mail (in the US, this would be Certified Mail) to prove that the item was sent, then if the patent issues anyway and gets litigated, you could contact the defendant and tell them about what you did.
Actually, the presiding officer usually gets to decide how long a quorum call lasts, assuming that the required number of members (a majority) don't show up, and assuming that nobody moves to dispense with the quorum call.
If there really isn't a quorum of members present, then the Senate (or House, as the case may be) either has to adjourn or instruct the Sergeant-at-Arms to bring the members to the floor.
Since it only takes one person to suggest the absence of a quorum, sneaky business in the US Congress is usually left to behind-closed-doors meetings such as conference committees.
Technically, the number is for a Patent Application Publication. The application itself has a different number, in this case, 11/860336.
If it issues, it'll get a third number - the patent number - which, as the parent poster mentioned, is currently somewhere just barely above 7,500,000.
Sorry, I guess my example was poorly expressed. I didn't mean that every single time, the captcha asks you to click on the Siamese cat. Rather, it asks you to click on {insert randomly chosen class here} and displays a bunch of photos, one of which corresponds to that class.
The only way you can really overcome a classifier like that is to overwhelm the person using it by providing them with too many classes, or overwhelm the classifier by providing too much variety within each class. It's a lot easier to add new photos corresponding to a class, or to add a new class of photos, than it is to do the same for a 3d model.
Of course, neither the 3d captcha nor the photo captcha is undefeatable. I was just saying that the 3d captcha is harder to maintain and thus easier to defeat in the long run.
But I do know that there's lots of other animals that are not human, but that show without any doubt that they can suffer from pain much like humans do.
Are you really that certain? How can you prove that it's actual pain, and not merely you anthropomorphizing the behavior you observe in other animals?
Sadly - or perhaps fortunately, depending on how you plan to apply the technology - classification of 3d objects against a known library of objects is a mostly solved problem. There are a few ways to go about doing it, such as neural networks, boosting classifiers, or support vector machines, but you essentially train a set of classifiers against a bunch of known images of the 3d objects from different perspectives, and thereafter, it tells you what class of images best represents the image that you query it with.
The hard part here is training the classifiers. The training methods require you to know ahead of time what classes your training sets are supposed to be categorized in, which means that every time somebody adds a 3d object into their captcha, you would have to get enough sample images to train your classifier.
One could also potentially use several training images to reconstruct the 3d object, and then search over the possible rotations to see which one the query image matches.
Personally, I think the regular photographic captchas (i.e., "click on the Siamese cat") are a better idea.
Cleveland is like that, and it's mostly a holdover from maybe 10 or 20 years ago when there were almost no left turn arrows anywhere in the city. You pretty much had to pull out into the intersection to make a left during rush hour, and the six people behind you (mostly well behind the stop bar) would happily follow you when the light turned red and you moved to clear the intersection.
Pittsburgh, on the other hand, has developed a system unusual enough to get called the "Pittsburgh Left". In Pittsburgh, you're expected (according to local custom, but not the law) to floor it as soon as the light turns green in your direction, blowing past the oncoming traffic that hasn't quite moved into the intersection yet.
It's still DRM. On a side note, I buy lots of games, mostly through Steam these days.
The reasons why I don't mind Steam's DRM so much are (a) it doesn't incorporate install limits; (b) it doesn't fsck your system with a rootkit, device driver, or other crap that causes problems with your other software/hardware; and (c) it's not that much different from online gaming, which I do also. In addition, it actually adds some minor functionality, in terms of not needing to keep the original install media around, increasing the convenience of installation, and giving me the chance to try out indie games at low prices that I otherwise probably would never see.
One, we have roughly 10,000 power plants of all types in the US.
Two, transmission losses are roughly 10% (up from 5% 40 years ago, largely due to a failure to improve the transmission grid on par with the increase in load).
And three, I'm pretty sure the efficiencies being talked about earlier are related to economies of scale. That is, you can build a large power plant at a cost much cheaper per unit of capacity than a corresponding number of small plants.
This past September they had to evacuate a Philadelphia Phillies game at Citizens Bank Park because someone confused a fucking hot dog wrapper for a bomb.
And this, my friends, is why they should cut you off after six beers at baseball games.
Positive points: extensive search functions (e.g. search on all different fields), ability to save searches, ability to download search results as spreadsheets (not figured out how yet).
I must be jaded by the search functionality we have at work. The big thing that Google and various other search sites lack is proximity operators.
While the USPTO external website doesn't provide proximity operators, it does let you search on all fields in the advanced search. You can use the same search tools that examiners use if you visit the public search room at the USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, and I think at least some of the examiner search tools are also available at the various Patent and Trademark Depository Library locations around the country.
All of the various "free patents" sites are pure spam. The USPTO, like many other patent offices around the world, lets you view patents online for free - including free from ads.
In this particular case, you can read the patent here, straight from the horse's mouth.
Slashdot Mirror
An eleven-foot long black cuboid.
Considering that the universe is a spheroid region 705 meters in diameter, that cuboid is doing pretty well for itself.
I can't imagine this being entirely safe. What if someone points it where it rolls out into the middle of a busy intersection, and somebody slams on their brakes or swerves to avoid it, causing an accident or hitting a pedestrian?
By this logic, people should never take their children outdoors ever.
The US doesn't field many, if any, megaton warheads anymore. I'm not sure how the Russians are doing on this, but I would guess that most of their reductions have been of the highest-yield weapons as well.
The US is a first-to-invent country (the only one in the world, actually). In the US, if two pending applications claim the same stuff, an interference proceeding is held to determine who reduced the invention to practice first and/or who had a complete conception of the entire claimed invention first combined with due diligence thereafter in reducing the invention to practice.
If you invent something without filing for a patent on it, and then I invent it independently but I do patent it, then if I sue you for infringement, your defense could be that you were using the invention in the US more than a year before my filing date, or (as a more difficult approach) you could prove that I didn't actually invent it first.
The USPTO frowns on using Wikipedia as prior art.
Not necessarily. The Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences has cited Wikipedia several times. What's more, the fact that Wikipedia keeps a history allows examiners to go back to pick up the version of the page that actually counts as prior art.
The Wayback Machine on the Internet Archive is another good tool that examiners can use. It's especially good for when an applicant or company blabs about their stuff on their website and then tries to file a patent on it more than a year later.
However, when it comes to using Wikipedia as a place to ensconce your public domain invention, it's probably not the best tool for that. Wikipedia gets used a lot when an examiner doesn't understand something, but most patent applications are close enough to the bleeding edge that Wikipedia's not that great for anything but knocking out the basics or just learning unfamiliar terminology.
As for Google, more and more examiners use Google these days, but it pales in comparison to the search tools that examiners have for searching through patents, published applications, statutory invention registrations, and the abstracts of published journal articles and conference proceedings.
Ultimately, if you really really want an invention put into the public domain and don't mind the cost, a statutory invention registration is how to do it. It's cheaper than a patent application because there's no search fee involved, but there is still a fee for publication and classification. I don't know what the fee total is, but it's apparently at least $920, and you may need the assistance or advice of an attorney to help you get it in the proper form (it should look more or less like a patent application).
Another way to go about this is to forward the piece of prior art to the attorney and/or the applicant. They are required by law to disclose things they know about that are material to patentability (see 37 CFR 1.56). Failure to fulfill the duty to disclose can be grounds for invalidation of a patent. If you send it through some form of return-receipt mail (in the US, this would be Certified Mail) to prove that the item was sent, then if the patent issues anyway and gets litigated, you could contact the defendant and tell them about what you did.
One at a time?
No, it quacks them all simultaneously. It's a quantum duck.
Actually, the presiding officer usually gets to decide how long a quorum call lasts, assuming that the required number of members (a majority) don't show up, and assuming that nobody moves to dispense with the quorum call.
If there really isn't a quorum of members present, then the Senate (or House, as the case may be) either has to adjourn or instruct the Sergeant-at-Arms to bring the members to the floor.
Since it only takes one person to suggest the absence of a quorum, sneaky business in the US Congress is usually left to behind-closed-doors meetings such as conference committees.
Alternatively, you could just increase the speed of light, which scientists did in 2208.
Are you sure you're not thinking of "mounting your pimps"?
Technically, the number is for a Patent Application Publication. The application itself has a different number, in this case, 11/860336.
If it issues, it'll get a third number - the patent number - which, as the parent poster mentioned, is currently somewhere just barely above 7,500,000.
I asked and got no answer? Is there a specific language? I tried both english and norwegian.
Everyone knows that servers speak Swedish.
And by Swedish, I mean, b0rk b0rk b0rk!
Sorry, I guess my example was poorly expressed. I didn't mean that every single time, the captcha asks you to click on the Siamese cat. Rather, it asks you to click on {insert randomly chosen class here} and displays a bunch of photos, one of which corresponds to that class.
The only way you can really overcome a classifier like that is to overwhelm the person using it by providing them with too many classes, or overwhelm the classifier by providing too much variety within each class. It's a lot easier to add new photos corresponding to a class, or to add a new class of photos, than it is to do the same for a 3d model.
Of course, neither the 3d captcha nor the photo captcha is undefeatable. I was just saying that the 3d captcha is harder to maintain and thus easier to defeat in the long run.
But I do know that there's lots of other animals that are not human, but that show without any doubt that they can suffer from pain much like humans do.
Are you really that certain? How can you prove that it's actual pain, and not merely you anthropomorphizing the behavior you observe in other animals?
Sadly - or perhaps fortunately, depending on how you plan to apply the technology - classification of 3d objects against a known library of objects is a mostly solved problem. There are a few ways to go about doing it, such as neural networks, boosting classifiers, or support vector machines, but you essentially train a set of classifiers against a bunch of known images of the 3d objects from different perspectives, and thereafter, it tells you what class of images best represents the image that you query it with.
The hard part here is training the classifiers. The training methods require you to know ahead of time what classes your training sets are supposed to be categorized in, which means that every time somebody adds a 3d object into their captcha, you would have to get enough sample images to train your classifier.
One could also potentially use several training images to reconstruct the 3d object, and then search over the possible rotations to see which one the query image matches.
Personally, I think the regular photographic captchas (i.e., "click on the Siamese cat") are a better idea.
Cleveland is like that, and it's mostly a holdover from maybe 10 or 20 years ago when there were almost no left turn arrows anywhere in the city. You pretty much had to pull out into the intersection to make a left during rush hour, and the six people behind you (mostly well behind the stop bar) would happily follow you when the light turned red and you moved to clear the intersection.
Pittsburgh, on the other hand, has developed a system unusual enough to get called the "Pittsburgh Left". In Pittsburgh, you're expected (according to local custom, but not the law) to floor it as soon as the light turns green in your direction, blowing past the oncoming traffic that hasn't quite moved into the intersection yet.
It's still DRM. On a side note, I buy lots of games, mostly through Steam these days.
The reasons why I don't mind Steam's DRM so much are (a) it doesn't incorporate install limits; (b) it doesn't fsck your system with a rootkit, device driver, or other crap that causes problems with your other software/hardware; and (c) it's not that much different from online gaming, which I do also. In addition, it actually adds some minor functionality, in terms of not needing to keep the original install media around, increasing the convenience of installation, and giving me the chance to try out indie games at low prices that I otherwise probably would never see.
One, we have roughly 10,000 power plants of all types in the US.
Two, transmission losses are roughly 10% (up from 5% 40 years ago, largely due to a failure to improve the transmission grid on par with the increase in load).
And three, I'm pretty sure the efficiencies being talked about earlier are related to economies of scale. That is, you can build a large power plant at a cost much cheaper per unit of capacity than a corresponding number of small plants.
Reports from the sub indicate an 82 degree roll was taken at the time of impact.
Now that's what I call a waste of perfectly good coffee!
This past September they had to evacuate a Philadelphia Phillies game at Citizens Bank Park because someone confused a fucking hot dog wrapper for a bomb.
And this, my friends, is why they should cut you off after six beers at baseball games.
Positive points: extensive search functions (e.g. search on all different fields), ability to save searches, ability to download search results as spreadsheets (not figured out how yet).
I must be jaded by the search functionality we have at work. The big thing that Google and various other search sites lack is proximity operators.
While the USPTO external website doesn't provide proximity operators, it does let you search on all fields in the advanced search. You can use the same search tools that examiners use if you visit the public search room at the USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, and I think at least some of the examiner search tools are also available at the various Patent and Trademark Depository Library locations around the country.
Just so you know, if your hadron doesn't decay within four hours, you're supposed to call your doctor.
All of the various "free patents" sites are pure spam. The USPTO, like many other patent offices around the world, lets you view patents online for free - including free from ads.
In this particular case, you can read the patent here, straight from the horse's mouth.
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!
There was an estimate that it would take about 100 billion to end world hunger; Give everyone a roof, clean water.
That's assuming none of it gets intercepted by warlords.