We effectively have that, you just dislike their methodology. The Texas court in question handles so many patent cases, that it is the defacto dedicated court.
But they got that way by illegally intentionally favoring a specific point of view, favoring patent holders no matter how ridiculous the patent or complaint. One major factor is their strong belief in jury trials, which slows things down, and raises trial costs significantly, and increases the risk of a ridiculous over the top jury award. All of these factors encourage people to settle.
True. Also, the huge costs means the international market has become essential, meaning all stories have to work for all cultures. Can't piss off the Chinese, is just one example of the issue.
You have a point, but missed my point, which is also correct.
Netflix (etc.) does do some remakes/reboots/sequels. - more than 10%. Hollywood always did some remakes. But modern Hollywood is 95% remake/reboot/etc. Hollywood used to be more balanced. Now, Hollywood insists on massive budgets for productions (superhero for example.) For this reason, they insist on a 'proven' subject, hence the remakes.
The remakes, etc. are the SYMPTOM, not the cause of my subject Lack of originality has destroyed Hollywood.. I should also throw in "cowardly refusal to take risks, as it is another cause.
Look, they are selling closed software. Frankly it's shocking they recommend any open source. The numbers seem random to me, but then I did not read their so called report.
That will not work. You are misunderstanding the major issue - which is the same for low skilled workers as high skilled workers. Employers do not want to pay the wage that americans demand for doing that work.
Their is a simple solution that WILL work. Create a new type of visa/ green card, called an A10 Visa (or whatever) The rules are simple for the A10.
1) The US will give out unlimited number of A10 visas to anyone that is legally allowed to visit the US. Anyone that wants one can get it
2) A10 Visas come with a number similar to a social security number, but starts with the letter A. When you get work with an A10 Visa, your employer is required to pay an additional 10% of your salary directly to the Federal government.
3) Any state may (or may not), pass a law adding a state tax equal to up to an additional 15% income tax on top of the Federal Tax.
4) Anyone, including foreign workers, can report someone hiring foreign workers but not paying the A10 taxes. Should the employer be found guilty, the reporting person (which can be the worker) gets a set fee of $10,000, and the employer goes to jail for a minimum of 2 years.
Note, currently H1 Visas tend to get paid about 10% less than Americans doing the same job.
End result - American workers do not need to worry about illegals costing the country money or stealing jobs - unless those jobs pay so little that an American won't agree to do them for 10% more than the foreign workers get.
If the state (I'm looking at you South West), thinks this isn't enough, they can up it to 25% - and suffer the resulting lack of foreign workers who head to California and other friendlier states.
What you describe is the rational for the "Audience" score part of Rotten Tomatoes. It is assumed that people that like Superhero movies are more likely to see a Superhero movie, particularly early enough to rate it.
Otherwise there is no little reason to accept random people's review of a movie when the critics review is available (with the exception that proves the rule of movie that targets critics, i.e. that piece of crap "Hail Caeser" which was entirely devoted to in jokes about 1950's movies, hence the movie obsessed critics thought it was hilllarious while the rest of us said eh).
Just because a movie sucked, doesn't mean the producer do not deserve massive amounts of money for it. They put a lot of work into it!
How dare those SOBS tell people what they thought about the movie. They have no right to freely talk about the movie - it's not like they are the President - not when BUSINESS is on the line.
Your entire statement proves your are wrong or outright evil. You claim resource problems are a myth then say that scarce resources cause poverty and that means population expansion ceases. First of all poverty IS a resource problem. Poverty = not enough money = not enough resources.
Population expansion is caused by more births than deaths. Poverty does not reduce the birth rate, it increases it. But it does increase the death rate more than the birth rate.
Population up with scarce resources = poverty = deaths caused by: famine, disease, drought, war, crime, etc. (all symptoms of resource scarcity).
It is true that recently (in the past two hundred years) birth control and capitalism combined with a larger enough population for scientific research has led to far better resource management and expansion. That is a recent phenomena and NOT related to resource scarcity. That is, science ameliorates the problem you describe, but it is NOT an automatic solution.
It is true that population does expand to fit our current resources, but it is not true that = constant scarcity.
If you are upper middle class family with 2 children and own a media room with a large (60 inch +) TV with fancy seats and a seperate speaker system, then it makes sense to get this product.
Your media room is close enough to theater environment, and it is cheaper to pay $30 for one movie than to buy 4 movie tickets.
And you can also invite friends over and have a party.
Think of it like a superbowl party, but instead it is a DeadPool 2 party.
A) Patents are anti-capitalism. And so are similar IP issues, such as copyrights. Patents were created under mercantilism, and they were not for inventors, but for friends of the king. Later when capitalism came along, we needed some way to encourage invention in a free market society where competition was essential. They could have set up a simple 10% fee structure, but instead went for an unlimited patent system. Big mistake. But capitalism was strong enough to handle it in most of the early cases. But in time the patent holders expanded their power, particularly in life or death situations (pay what we demand if you want this life saving medicine - or die).
B) The world has changed significantly since those IP deals were created, speeding up. What used to take 10 years now takes 1. The real time that would be appropiate for those licenses is measured in more like 5 years, not 50. I.E. most of the honest profit is made in the first 5 years, after that it's dishonest prevention of innovation.
Go talk to a lawyer. They will tell you that a) That's not how the law works. b) It works on a buyer be ware basis, c) it would have to be a Supreme Court judge to make it stick and d) laugh in your face.
Look, if I offered to sell you a home, but after putting down a downpayment you read the contract and it turned out to be a hundred year lease, you would be damn upset.
But that's what the software people do. They are actually renting licenses with all sorts of secret provisions while the salesmen are using the word 'buy' or 'sell'.
Every time you 'buy a license', it is you RENTING a license. It may be a 'lifetime' license, but that is what it is.
The only people that actually 'buy' software or music are the people that buy the copyrights.
We need a simple law that clarifies this point. Out law the use of the words 'buy' or 'sell' when dealing with a license - including physical products that include a necessary license, such as those evil John Deere Tractors.
Then when some shmuck tries to sell a John Deere tractor, arrest them for fraud, as they are actually renting it to you for an unspecified amount of time. If they want to use the words 'buy' or sell', they have to include free-as-in-speech software on it. Otherwise, it is fraud, punishable by a fine.
1) When ever talking about numbers you need several points of comparison. For example, let's say a college education really does end up costing $500,000 in 18 years - but the average salary for a high school teacher is $400,000. It's called inflation, and you need to account for it.
2) The rate fo growth is currently high in part because of the attempt to raise stated prices in order to pay for discounted admissions for more students. The basic idea is to charge the wealthier people as much as the market will bear and still allow poorer people to attend. It will not continue to rise at the same rate,
1) It's not an either/or situation. Encrypt it as well
2) You ever build encryption software yourself? It's far more complicated. The only reason you think otherwise is that you buy off the shelf . My USB self-destructor can be built and sold rather easily. Then your only problem is 'authorities' getting wise to the appearance, which you can change every month.
First you have to fix it. If you don't, then you don't deserve to send out email. Because right now, many criminals take over computers and use them to send out spam and the computer's owner does not fix it.
Second, you have to drop that email account and use another one. Not that hard, they are free from gmail, prrotonmail, outlook, yahoo etc. If your entire email server is pawned, then you have to change the domain. Consider it the appropriate punishment for failing to maintain proper security - it's a lot cheaper than paying to deal with ID theft that typically happens when someone hacks your computer.
Human caused problems generally are easy to solve but are not because established interests prevent them.
Email spam is entirely due to the total absence of sender verification. Require some form of sender verification with the ability to complain (and block those with excessive complaints) and you solve the issue.
People always mistake processing power for intelligence. They are NOT the same, anymore than memory = intelligence.
The ability to remember more facts than the human mind can does not make your smarter than a human. Nor does the ability to do math calculations faster mean anything either.
Intelligence is an entirely different thing than either memory or math (math includes logic and pattern recognition).
Robots are no where near being actually intelligent. None of our attempts to create it have come anywhere near close, we are qualittaively unable to create the smallest amount of real intelligence.
There is the CHANCE that as they are given enough processing power and enough memory that we might make a breakthrough - or more likely they could spontaneously develop intelligence.
But the statement that it will happen is patently ignorant of the issues involved and the current state of the science.
Etherkillers (and their ilk) have three prong plugs that you have to plug into an outlet with surge protection in addition to the port plugging into the computer.
As such, it is clearly and obviously a device designed to destroy computers, and can not be mistaken for a run of the mill, safe thing to plug into your computer.
No one - not event he stupidest cop that confiscates your device is going to make the mistake of destroying their own computer using it.
The USB killer is in a class by itself - it can easily be used as protection against someone else viewing your data.
The real advantage of such a device is combining it with a real, hidden USB drive, that destroy's the real data on the real memory chip when you use the obvious USB port, rather than the hidden one. Perfect to store stuff you don't want the enemy to see.
So speaks ignorance. Pedophiles have a lower recidivism rate than most other crimes i.e. not only CAN they be reformed, if not cured, but we are better at doing it than for most other crimes.
People convicted of sex crimes against children and released have less than 4% chance of being arrested again for sex crimes against children - but over 40% chance of being arrested again for any crime. And yes, they check the computer when they arrest them for littering.
In other words, the cops go after them, but most never re-offend against children.
There are several reasons for this, including a relatively high death rate in prison (child molesters are targetted), long prison sentences (if you get arrested at 40 and released at 60, your sex drive has faded), and also mandatory counseling.
Basically, you are just an ignorant person repeating an old meme that has been repeatably proven wrong.
Numbers from the 1994 government study (https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/rsorp94.txt)
2) If you do any of the following, it is a sex crime and most people will not consider you a 'pervert'. a) Get caught peeing in public (arrested for exposure) b) Being 21 and have sex with a woman that SAID she was 18, but was 15, (we all know how women never lie about their age)., c) Get drunk and have sex with a woman that is asleep. Congratulations, you are now a date rapist. But almost no one I know would consider you a pervert. If you are one, so is half the college students.
3) Sex crimes are INCREDIBALY subjectively prosecuted. Much more so than regular crime. Mainly because sex crimes are all about motive and mentality. It's a crime that occures in the mind, where everything is subjective.
Have naked pictures of your 5 year old child a bath tub? If you convince the prosecutor they are 'innocent' you have no trouble. If the prosecutor believes the pictures are 'lascivious', you go to jail.
We can fix it, it just takes some guts - and regulations.
The following laws would work:
1) Any service that tracks private information, must, by law offer a more expensive version that does not retain said information beyond minimum neccessary billing information. They can price it however they like - as long as at least 10% of their customers agree to pay that price. Should they mistakenly track said information, they owe their victims ten times whatever they were charged, dating from the time they began tracking to the time they cut the check. This includes social networking sites.
2) If you pay for no tracking, then the company can not give out ANY information to a government or other official without a warrant (note warrant, not subpoena). We have the right to privacy from the government unless they can demonstrate a valid need to a judge.
3) By law, no information inputed electronically that is not essential to the service, can be 'mandatory'. No requiring people to give you their phone number unless your service needs to call them. No gender request unless it is a dating app, no address unless you are mailing them something. You can ask, but you can not require. People leave information blank on paper all the time, deal with empty fields.
Sex crimes are horrible - but not worse than murder.
Western culture has demonized it by spreading lies and falsehoods. The truth is:
1) People convicted of sex crimes are LESS likely to commit more crimes than other criminals (this includes pedophiles).
2) Most people convicted of 'sex crimes' are normal, healthy people, not strange perverts.
3) Sex crimes are incredibly subjectively prosecuted. Homosexuals are likely to be arrested, tried and convicted for the exact same behavior that straight men or women would be ignored at (for example, asking someone out for a date => soliciting prostitution) Teenagers routinely create 'child pornography' and usually (but not if the prosecutor dislikes you), have it swept under the rug.
4) Sex, being something people are ashamed of, is often used by the police to legally extort people into confessing to crimes they did not do in order to avoid sex crime charges.
Slashdot Mirror
We effectively have that, you just dislike their methodology. The Texas court in question handles so many patent cases, that it is the defacto dedicated court.
But they got that way by illegally intentionally favoring a specific point of view, favoring patent holders no matter how ridiculous the patent or complaint. One major factor is their strong belief in jury trials, which slows things down, and raises trial costs significantly, and increases the risk of a ridiculous over the top jury award. All of these factors encourage people to settle.
True. Also, the huge costs means the international market has become essential, meaning all stories have to work for all cultures. Can't piss off the Chinese, is just one example of the issue.
Netflix can make shows catering to small markets.
You have a point, but missed my point, which is also correct.
Netflix (etc.) does do some remakes/reboots/sequels. - more than 10%. Hollywood always did some remakes. But modern Hollywood is 95% remake/reboot/etc. Hollywood used to be more balanced. Now, Hollywood insists on massive budgets for productions (superhero for example.) For this reason, they insist on a 'proven' subject, hence the remakes.
The remakes, etc. are the SYMPTOM, not the cause of my subject Lack of originality has destroyed Hollywood.. I should also throw in "cowardly refusal to take risks, as it is another cause.
Go look at Hollywood movies and try to find one that is not:
1) a Remake
2) a Sequel
3) Based on a book/videogame or similar items.
And traditional TV isn't much better - Riverdale, Lethal Weapon, Supergirl, etc. etc.
Now check out Netflix's stuff.
Yes, Netflix is pumping money into it - because they are making more money than Hollywood because they are MAKING GOOD, ORIGINAL SHOWS.
Don't blame the winner for earning more money and reinvesting it. Blame the loser for losing their market share.
Look, they are selling closed software. Frankly it's shocking they recommend any open source. The numbers seem random to me, but then I did not read their so called report.
That will not work. You are misunderstanding the major issue - which is the same for low skilled workers as high skilled workers.
Employers do not want to pay the wage that americans demand for doing that work.
Their is a simple solution that WILL work. Create a new type of visa/ green card, called an A10 Visa (or whatever) The rules are simple for the A10.
1) The US will give out unlimited number of A10 visas to anyone that is legally allowed to visit the US. Anyone that wants one can get it
2) A10 Visas come with a number similar to a social security number, but starts with the letter A. When you get work with an A10 Visa, your employer is required to pay an additional 10% of your salary directly to the Federal government.
3) Any state may (or may not), pass a law adding a state tax equal to up to an additional 15% income tax on top of the Federal Tax.
4) Anyone, including foreign workers, can report someone hiring foreign workers but not paying the A10 taxes. Should the employer be found guilty, the reporting person (which can be the worker) gets a set fee of $10,000, and the employer goes to jail for a minimum of 2 years.
Note, currently H1 Visas tend to get paid about 10% less than Americans doing the same job.
End result - American workers do not need to worry about illegals costing the country money or stealing jobs - unless those jobs pay so little that an American won't agree to do them for 10% more than the foreign workers get.
If the state (I'm looking at you South West), thinks this isn't enough, they can up it to 25% - and suffer the resulting lack of foreign workers who head to California and other friendlier states.
What you describe is the rational for the "Audience" score part of Rotten Tomatoes. It is assumed that people that like Superhero movies are more likely to see a Superhero movie, particularly early enough to rate it.
Otherwise there is no little reason to accept random people's review of a movie when the critics review is available (with the exception that proves the rule of movie that targets critics, i.e. that piece of crap "Hail Caeser" which was entirely devoted to in jokes about 1950's movies, hence the movie obsessed critics thought it was hilllarious while the rest of us said eh).
Same answer as my last patent post.
If you want to maintain control over something while gaining money, you RENT it.
If you SELL it, you give up the right to tell people what to do with it.
Just because a movie sucked, doesn't mean the producer do not deserve massive amounts of money for it. They put a lot of work into it!
How dare those SOBS tell people what they thought about the movie. They have no right to freely talk about the movie - it's not like they are the President - not when BUSINESS is on the line.
End sarcasm
Your entire statement proves your are wrong or outright evil. You claim resource problems are a myth then say that scarce resources cause poverty and that means population expansion ceases. First of all poverty IS a resource problem. Poverty = not enough money = not enough resources.
Population expansion is caused by more births than deaths. Poverty does not reduce the birth rate, it increases it. But it does increase the death rate more than the birth rate.
Population up with scarce resources = poverty = deaths caused by: famine, disease, drought, war, crime, etc. (all symptoms of resource scarcity).
It is true that recently (in the past two hundred years) birth control and capitalism combined with a larger enough population for scientific research has led to far better resource management and expansion. That is a recent phenomena and NOT related to resource scarcity. That is, science ameliorates the problem you describe, but it is NOT an automatic solution.
It is true that population does expand to fit our current resources, but it is not true that = constant scarcity.
If you are upper middle class family with 2 children and own a media room with a large (60 inch +) TV with fancy seats and a seperate speaker system, then it makes sense to get this product.
Your media room is close enough to theater environment, and it is cheaper to pay $30 for one movie than to buy 4 movie tickets.
And you can also invite friends over and have a party.
Think of it like a superbowl party, but instead it is a DeadPool 2 party.
The problem with 'cord cutting' is that it's not one streaming service, but many.
After you get Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, CBS all access, Playstation, HBO GO, Sling, you are paying way over $100/month.
It's not easy to compare them either.
You have a solid point. To add to what you say:
A) Patents are anti-capitalism. And so are similar IP issues, such as copyrights. Patents were created under mercantilism, and they were not for inventors, but for friends of the king. Later when capitalism came along, we needed some way to encourage invention in a free market society where competition was essential. They could have set up a simple 10% fee structure, but instead went for an unlimited patent system. Big mistake. But capitalism was strong enough to handle it in most of the early cases. But in time the patent holders expanded their power, particularly in life or death situations (pay what we demand if you want this life saving medicine - or die).
B) The world has changed significantly since those IP deals were created, speeding up. What used to take 10 years now takes 1. The real time that would be appropiate for those licenses is measured in more like 5 years, not 50. I.E. most of the honest profit is made in the first 5 years, after that it's dishonest prevention of innovation.
Go talk to a lawyer. They will tell you that a) That's not how the law works. b) It works on a buyer be ware basis, c) it would have to be a Supreme Court judge to make it stick and d) laugh in your face.
Look, if I offered to sell you a home, but after putting down a downpayment you read the contract and it turned out to be a hundred year lease, you would be damn upset.
But that's what the software people do. They are actually renting licenses with all sorts of secret provisions while the salesmen are using the word 'buy' or 'sell'.
Every time you 'buy a license', it is you RENTING a license. It may be a 'lifetime' license, but that is what it is.
The only people that actually 'buy' software or music are the people that buy the copyrights.
We need a simple law that clarifies this point. Out law the use of the words 'buy' or 'sell' when dealing with a license - including physical products that include a necessary license, such as those evil John Deere Tractors.
Then when some shmuck tries to sell a John Deere tractor, arrest them for fraud, as they are actually renting it to you for an unspecified amount of time. If they want to use the words 'buy' or sell', they have to include free-as-in-speech software on it. Otherwise, it is fraud, punishable by a fine.
1) When ever talking about numbers you need several points of comparison.
For example, let's say a college education really does end up costing $500,000 in 18 years - but the average salary for a high school teacher is $400,000. It's called inflation, and you need to account for it.
2) The rate fo growth is currently high in part because of the attempt to raise stated prices in order to pay for discounted admissions for more students. The basic idea is to charge the wealthier people as much as the market will bear and still allow poorer people to attend. It will not continue to rise at the same rate,
1) It's not an either/or situation. Encrypt it as well
2) You ever build encryption software yourself? It's far more complicated. The only reason you think otherwise is that you buy off the shelf . My USB self-destructor can be built and sold rather easily. Then your only problem is 'authorities' getting wise to the appearance, which you can change every month.
First you have to fix it. If you don't, then you don't deserve to send out email. Because right now, many criminals take over computers and use them to send out spam and the computer's owner does not fix it.
Second, you have to drop that email account and use another one. Not that hard, they are free from gmail, prrotonmail, outlook, yahoo etc. If your entire email server is pawned, then you have to change the domain. Consider it the appropriate punishment for failing to maintain proper security - it's a lot cheaper than paying to deal with ID theft that typically happens when someone hacks your computer.
Human caused problems generally are easy to solve but are not because established interests prevent them.
Email spam is entirely due to the total absence of sender verification. Require some form of sender verification with the ability to complain (and block those with excessive complaints) and you solve the issue.
People always mistake processing power for intelligence. They are NOT the same, anymore than memory = intelligence.
The ability to remember more facts than the human mind can does not make your smarter than a human. Nor does the ability to do math calculations faster mean anything either.
Intelligence is an entirely different thing than either memory or math (math includes logic and pattern recognition).
Robots are no where near being actually intelligent. None of our attempts to create it have come anywhere near close, we are qualittaively unable to create the smallest amount of real intelligence.
There is the CHANCE that as they are given enough processing power and enough memory that we might make a breakthrough - or more likely they could spontaneously develop intelligence.
But the statement that it will happen is patently ignorant of the issues involved and the current state of the science.
You are missing the point.
Etherkillers (and their ilk) have three prong plugs that you have to plug into an outlet with surge protection in addition to the port plugging into the computer.
As such, it is clearly and obviously a device designed to destroy computers, and can not be mistaken for a run of the mill, safe thing to plug into your computer.
No one - not event he stupidest cop that confiscates your device is going to make the mistake of destroying their own computer using it.
The USB killer is in a class by itself - it can easily be used as protection against someone else viewing your data.
The real advantage of such a device is combining it with a real, hidden USB drive, that destroy's the real data on the real memory chip when you use the obvious USB port, rather than the hidden one. Perfect to store stuff you don't want the enemy to see.
So speaks ignorance. Pedophiles have a lower recidivism rate than most other crimes i.e. not only CAN they be reformed, if not cured, but we are better at doing it than for most other crimes.
People convicted of sex crimes against children and released have less than 4% chance of being arrested again for sex crimes against children - but over 40% chance of being arrested again for any crime. And yes, they check the computer when they arrest them for littering.
In other words, the cops go after them, but most never re-offend against children.
There are several reasons for this, including a relatively high death rate in prison (child molesters are targetted), long prison sentences (if you get arrested at 40 and released at 60, your sex drive has faded), and also mandatory counseling.
Basically, you are just an ignorant person repeating an old meme that has been repeatably proven wrong.
Numbers from the 1994 government study (https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/rsorp94.txt)
Do your research, don't simply tell other people that I am wrong without CHECKING. You want proof? Here:
1) Sex criminals less likely (do a simple google search):
http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...
https://www.scientificamerican...
And many others.
2) If you do any of the following, it is a sex crime and most people will not consider you a 'pervert'.
a) Get caught peeing in public (arrested for exposure)
b) Being 21 and have sex with a woman that SAID she was 18, but was 15, (we all know how women never lie about their age).,
c) Get drunk and have sex with a woman that is asleep. Congratulations, you are now a date rapist. But almost no one I know would consider you a pervert. If you are one, so is half the college students.
3) Sex crimes are INCREDIBALY subjectively prosecuted. Much more so than regular crime. Mainly because sex crimes are all about motive and mentality. It's a crime that occures in the mind, where everything is subjective.
Have naked pictures of your 5 year old child a bath tub? If you convince the prosecutor they are 'innocent' you have no trouble. If the prosecutor believes the pictures are 'lascivious', you go to jail.
We can fix it, it just takes some guts - and regulations.
The following laws would work:
1) Any service that tracks private information, must, by law offer a more expensive version that does not retain said information beyond minimum neccessary billing information. They can price it however they like - as long as at least 10% of their customers agree to pay that price. Should they mistakenly track said information, they owe their victims ten times whatever they were charged, dating from the time they began tracking to the time they cut the check. This includes social networking sites.
2) If you pay for no tracking, then the company can not give out ANY information to a government or other official without a warrant (note warrant, not subpoena). We have the right to privacy from the government unless they can demonstrate a valid need to a judge.
3) By law, no information inputed electronically that is not essential to the service, can be 'mandatory'. No requiring people to give you their phone number unless your service needs to call them. No gender request unless it is a dating app, no address unless you are mailing them something. You can ask, but you can not require. People leave information blank on paper all the time, deal with empty fields.
Sex crimes are horrible - but not worse than murder.
Western culture has demonized it by spreading lies and falsehoods. The truth is:
1) People convicted of sex crimes are LESS likely to commit more crimes than other criminals (this includes pedophiles).
2) Most people convicted of 'sex crimes' are normal, healthy people, not strange perverts.
3) Sex crimes are incredibly subjectively prosecuted. Homosexuals are likely to be arrested, tried and convicted for the exact same behavior that straight men or women would be ignored at (for example, asking someone out for a date => soliciting prostitution) Teenagers routinely create 'child pornography' and usually (but not if the prosecutor dislikes you), have it swept under the rug.
4) Sex, being something people are ashamed of, is often used by the police to legally extort people into confessing to crimes they did not do in order to avoid sex crime charges.