So, go ahead and find me a USB port on the flight deck of a C-17. I'll wait.
<crickets>
I thought so. Whatever they're doing to keep their pads charged beyond normal battery endurance, it'll be a workaround hack (issuing external USB-connected battery packs along with the pad) or some significant auxiliary systems re-engineering of in-service military transport aircraft.
Too bad Boeing and Lockheed-Martin didn't have you working for them back when they designed those aircraft. And also, that USB hadn't been invented back when they designed those aircraft.
ASFOC will make one decision, AMC another and the ANG another, and they never cooperate, costing tax payers millions.
In theory (i.e., the Federal Acquisition Regulations), they're supposed to. But the links in the story do make it look like a direct acquisition through the operational command, and not through an Air Force Materiel Command acquisition agency. I guess the cost of even thousands of overpriced iPads isn't enough money to warrant that.
Yeah, it's actually quite reasonable to question whether the issue of battery life and providing mains power in an airplane has even been considered. It's fairly routine for system acquisition agencies to overlook little technicalities like this.
Well, I'm not an aircraft engineer (either ground or flight), but I really don't remember 120v 60hz AC service routinely available on most military aircraft I've flown in. The stuff I've seen is 120 Vac at 400hz or 28 Vdc.
I suppose a multi-billion dollar program to retrofit all these AMC aircraft to include US household current on the flight decks of the current transport aircraft inventory wouldn't be all bad...
Here are fact. What Honeywell's doing is legal. Their patents are valid.
Notice: I said nothing about "should". This is about facts: "the thing which was done" according the its Latin origin.
The facts can change as actors in these events act. For instance, a court could decide that the patents are crap, as I believe they should. Or that the patents should be compulsorily licensed to Nest. Or all patents should be abolished.
But we're not talking about "should" or "there oughta be a law", or "that ain't right". We're talking about facts, right?
Let's make the point of not confusing what we wish and what actually is. At best, it's confusing. At worst, it's rhetorically dishonest, a cheap form of begging the question: presuming your proposition (what you wish would happen) is actually already the premise (how things actually are) and then arguing from that fallacious point.
And if we are discussing "what should be", you can bring in related facts to support the argument, such as "this patent should have been prevented by this specific prior art" or "there's specific legal precedent for enforcing licensing in this similar case."
That's be great. That'd be the stuff Slashdot is really for. (Unless you're in the "Slashdot is for trolling" school of thought. In which case, carry on.)
It's certainly of no use whatsoever when trying to determine whether a behavior is beneficial or not.
Well, that rather depends on your definition of "benefit", doesn't it?
If you're a strict utilitarianist, maybe the greater market good is served by compulsory licensing or other type of competitive marketing arrangement.
If you're Honeywell, the greater good is served by sucking up every penny to be made, and if more pennies are to be made with aggressively exclusive use of the patents, then that's what shall be done.
In other words: your definition of the meaning of the word "beneficial" is pre-loaded with your worldview. Unfortunately, the law isn't written to accomodate that. Increasing the GDP, on the other hand, is of significant benefit to those whose fortunes rise and fall on the popular perception of prosperity (i.e., the same people who often make the rules about things like intellectual property.)
I'm sure you've heard the phrase "It's the economy, Dummy". The seething masses insist their "elected servants" grow the economy by any means legally possible, and supporting the business model of a large company (large employer, publicly traded company, etc.) falls right into that line.
That's the amazing part of this story that no one seems to be picking up on.
Google actually produced a beta which, by intent or accident, seems to actually be restricted to a beta-sized community, and not their entire customer base.
It's unprecedented, and if they follow through by removing the "beta" tag before making the browser widely available, it'll be the Singularity!
Yeah. And Apple owning the implementation of the technology would be a substantial roadblock those who want the ubiquity of public closed-circuit TV with the power of Echelon. Every microphone being monitored, decoded, and analyzed by AI, producing a constant flow of actionable intelligence.
No, you're right, I'm probably just being paranoid.
No, actually, that's the point. That's the technology trend of the 21st Century.
Every transport, protocol, or presentation which used to be carried over TCP or UDP will now be re-encapsulated and shipped down TCP/80 or TCP/443 with a hip new name.
Why? Because doing everything in a browser is COOL.
And that's a critical point. Support is not a revenue center. If they could get away with it, a large fraction of business would wash its hands and walk away.
If their own revenues (like, e-commerce servers) were at risk during this transition, you can be for damn sure that there would be a live warm cutover of a full parallel installation at the new site, with dual operations and a slow de-constitution plan at the old site for fallback purposes.
But a DRM server? Meh. I suppose we should feel grateful they're bothering to stand the things back up at all.
Which is why I don't buy single-player software which requires a live phone-home. Even Steam is pretty close to verboten, though not necessarily (since the games I'm thinking of can run without Steam authentication, at least for a while).
A privileges-control software package like LBE Privacy Guard purports to control individual app access to distinct individual permissions. I use that app, and it seems to work, but if it leaks access, I'm not certain I'd be able to tell, so YMMV.
Yes. In other words, competent programming would prevent this problem, like most software problems.
Now, the aggravating factor is that in the Android Dalvik runtime, apps aren't usually idle-killed and don't often exit. Some very user-interactive programs (like games) have some kind of "exit" option, but most apps just stay in the background, suspended but still holding system resources... in other words, their memory leaks can persist until (A) user force-closes the app from the system menu, or (B) user reboots.
In some sense both Apple and Samsung win. Small startup companies coming into this area now have to explain how they would take on either of these companies in an IP lawsuit and / or get licenses which will be so expensive their products become uncompetitive.
"When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers."
Exactly. If you're willing to undertake the effort, feel totally free to write a functional replacement, through cold clean-room reverse-engineering, and no one will criticize you.
Oh, wait, I'm sorry. Many will criticize you. You will be technically "in the right" and entirely within the law, but some of the more cult-like elements of the GPL faction will come after you for trying to leave the faith. Or else ascribe unprovable sinister motives.
Oh, well. I wish Tim Bird well. He and his clientele don't need the GPL, and the GPL doesn't need them.
If GPL enforcement of the Linux kernel is the real problem, really solve that instead of using Busybox as some kind of attractive extortion bait.
That's because you descend past Limbo, into Hell proper, and then turn left at Hellbuquerque (the famous "left toin at Hellbukoykee") and go an extra 60 miles to Detroit.
I dunno, maybe we can deputize the bullies to actually collect the tax, since they already have an ongoing taxation relationship with their victims, I mean taxpayers?
The Roman imperial publicani provide a useful model here.
The authority is required to maintain an orderly system, that is the authority's primary duty
And that, my friend, is the real lesson. The object of a system of authority is order, not justice. Justice matters only after injustice sufficiently compromises order (see: race riots, Arab Spring, etc.)
According to Esperantist legend, when Zamenhof (the initial creator of the Esperanto language) went to medical school, his father found his initial work notes on the language and burned it all, fearing that it was evidence that young Zamenhof was a spy.
This was in 1881, according to the sources I could find. So the "OMG SEECRET CODEZ" panic is well over a century old, at least.
Slashdot Mirror
So, go ahead and find me a USB port on the flight deck of a C-17. I'll wait.
<crickets>
I thought so. Whatever they're doing to keep their pads charged beyond normal battery endurance, it'll be a workaround hack (issuing external USB-connected battery packs along with the pad) or some significant auxiliary systems re-engineering of in-service military transport aircraft.
Too bad Boeing and Lockheed-Martin didn't have you working for them back when they designed those aircraft. And also, that USB hadn't been invented back when they designed those aircraft.
ASFOC will make one decision, AMC another and the ANG another, and they never cooperate, costing tax payers millions.
In theory (i.e., the Federal Acquisition Regulations), they're supposed to. But the links in the story do make it look like a direct acquisition through the operational command, and not through an Air Force Materiel Command acquisition agency. I guess the cost of even thousands of overpriced iPads isn't enough money to warrant that.
You're not an Air Force veteran, are you?
Yeah, it's actually quite reasonable to question whether the issue of battery life and providing mains power in an airplane has even been considered. It's fairly routine for system acquisition agencies to overlook little technicalities like this.
Well, I'm not an aircraft engineer (either ground or flight), but I really don't remember 120v 60hz AC service routinely available on most military aircraft I've flown in. The stuff I've seen is 120 Vac at 400hz or 28 Vdc.
I suppose a multi-billion dollar program to retrofit all these AMC aircraft to include US household current on the flight decks of the current transport aircraft inventory wouldn't be all bad...
Agreed.
This should have been story-modded "-1 Dupe" and "-1 Troll" and probably "-15 Irrational Wish Fulfillment".
Apparently, the illustrious Slashdot Story Pipeline works as well as the rest of the "editorial" system.
I find myself wishing someone had just posted a pointer to a (hypothetical) Florian Mueller blog-dropping about the case instead of this tripe.
Seriously. Please stop reading this story and read NYCL's submission instead. It has the virtue of being grounded in reality and based on fact.
"MomApplePieAmericanWayship."
"Freedomship?"
No, wait, I guess we reserve that last form for stuff from "cheese-eating-surrender-monkey-land".
"Patriotship." Yeeeeeaaaaah...
You haven't been paying attention lately, have you?
I dunno.
Here are fact. What Honeywell's doing is legal. Their patents are valid.
Notice: I said nothing about "should". This is about facts: "the thing which was done" according the its Latin origin.
The facts can change as actors in these events act. For instance, a court could decide that the patents are crap, as I believe they should. Or that the patents should be compulsorily licensed to Nest. Or all patents should be abolished.
But we're not talking about "should" or "there oughta be a law", or "that ain't right". We're talking about facts, right?
Let's make the point of not confusing what we wish and what actually is. At best, it's confusing. At worst, it's rhetorically dishonest, a cheap form of begging the question: presuming your proposition (what you wish would happen) is actually already the premise (how things actually are) and then arguing from that fallacious point.
And if we are discussing "what should be", you can bring in related facts to support the argument, such as "this patent should have been prevented by this specific prior art" or "there's specific legal precedent for enforcing licensing in this similar case."
That's be great. That'd be the stuff Slashdot is really for. (Unless you're in the "Slashdot is for trolling" school of thought. In which case, carry on.)
It's certainly of no use whatsoever when trying to determine whether a behavior is beneficial or not.
Well, that rather depends on your definition of "benefit", doesn't it?
If you're a strict utilitarianist, maybe the greater market good is served by compulsory licensing or other type of competitive marketing arrangement.
If you're Honeywell, the greater good is served by sucking up every penny to be made, and if more pennies are to be made with aggressively exclusive use of the patents, then that's what shall be done.
In other words: your definition of the meaning of the word "beneficial" is pre-loaded with your worldview. Unfortunately, the law isn't written to accomodate that. Increasing the GDP, on the other hand, is of significant benefit to those whose fortunes rise and fall on the popular perception of prosperity (i.e., the same people who often make the rules about things like intellectual property.)
I'm sure you've heard the phrase "It's the economy, Dummy". The seething masses insist their "elected servants" grow the economy by any means legally possible, and supporting the business model of a large company (large employer, publicly traded company, etc.) falls right into that line.
With the interesting side effect of calling most members of the armed forces crash test dummies.
I'm a veteran, and I have used VA medical care. I have to confess that this analogy works very well from that perspective.
That's the amazing part of this story that no one seems to be picking up on.
Google actually produced a beta which, by intent or accident, seems to actually be restricted to a beta-sized community, and not their entire customer base.
It's unprecedented, and if they follow through by removing the "beta" tag before making the browser widely available, it'll be the Singularity!
because of the rounded corners.
Wait, what?
When did this turn into an Apple design patent issue?
all the plaintiff would have to do is assert that Islam is their intellectual property, and it should be no problem
This approach has had significant success for other religious organizations, so I could see this working.
Yeah. And Apple owning the implementation of the technology would be a substantial roadblock those who want the ubiquity of public closed-circuit TV with the power of Echelon. Every microphone being monitored, decoded, and analyzed by AI, producing a constant flow of actionable intelligence.
No, you're right, I'm probably just being paranoid.
No, actually, that's the point. That's the technology trend of the 21st Century.
Every transport, protocol, or presentation which used to be carried over TCP or UDP will now be re-encapsulated and shipped down TCP/80 or TCP/443 with a hip new name.
Why? Because doing everything in a browser is COOL.
And that's a critical point. Support is not a revenue center. If they could get away with it, a large fraction of business would wash its hands and walk away.
If their own revenues (like, e-commerce servers) were at risk during this transition, you can be for damn sure that there would be a live warm cutover of a full parallel installation at the new site, with dual operations and a slow de-constitution plan at the old site for fallback purposes.
But a DRM server? Meh. I suppose we should feel grateful they're bothering to stand the things back up at all.
Which is why I don't buy single-player software which requires a live phone-home. Even Steam is pretty close to verboten, though not necessarily (since the games I'm thinking of can run without Steam authentication, at least for a while).
Meta-x psychoanalyze-slashdotter
A privileges-control software package like LBE Privacy Guard purports to control individual app access to distinct individual permissions. I use that app, and it seems to work, but if it leaks access, I'm not certain I'd be able to tell, so YMMV.
Yes. In other words, competent programming would prevent this problem, like most software problems.
Now, the aggravating factor is that in the Android Dalvik runtime, apps aren't usually idle-killed and don't often exit. Some very user-interactive programs (like games) have some kind of "exit" option, but most apps just stay in the background, suspended but still holding system resources... in other words, their memory leaks can persist until (A) user force-closes the app from the system menu, or (B) user reboots.
In some sense both Apple and Samsung win. Small startup companies coming into this area now have to explain how they would take on either of these companies in an IP lawsuit and / or get licenses which will be so expensive their products become uncompetitive.
-- Kikuyu proverb
Look, if you don't like the GPL, don't use it.
Exactly. If you're willing to undertake the effort, feel totally free to write a functional replacement, through cold clean-room reverse-engineering, and no one will criticize you.
Oh, wait, I'm sorry. Many will criticize you. You will be technically "in the right" and entirely within the law, but some of the more cult-like elements of the GPL faction will come after you for trying to leave the faith. Or else ascribe unprovable sinister motives.
Oh, well. I wish Tim Bird well. He and his clientele don't need the GPL, and the GPL doesn't need them.
If GPL enforcement of the Linux kernel is the real problem, really solve that instead of using Busybox as some kind of attractive extortion bait.
That's because you descend past Limbo, into Hell proper, and then turn left at Hellbuquerque (the famous "left toin at Hellbukoykee") and go an extra 60 miles to Detroit.
It's like the 12th Ring of Hell.
I dunno, maybe we can deputize the bullies to actually collect the tax, since they already have an ongoing taxation relationship with their victims, I mean taxpayers?
The Roman imperial publicani provide a useful model here.
The authority is required to maintain an orderly system, that is the authority's primary duty
And that, my friend, is the real lesson. The object of a system of authority is order, not justice. Justice matters only after injustice sufficiently compromises order (see: race riots, Arab Spring, etc.)
According to Esperantist legend, when Zamenhof (the initial creator of the Esperanto language) went to medical school, his father found his initial work notes on the language and burned it all, fearing that it was evidence that young Zamenhof was a spy.
This was in 1881, according to the sources I could find. So the "OMG SEECRET CODEZ" panic is well over a century old, at least.