real Net war in progress is over how much Hollywood is going to get paid to go away
And what would replace it? Your proposal assumes tech companies would produce content for what reason? Generosity to you? Do you really think Microsoft will produce movies you want to watch? Or that you'll find them on SourceForge?
There's plenty they could do differently today. Stealth technology, carbon fiber, etc. But all of that is expensive. Do you put new tires on the old Ford and drive it to work for another year, or buy a new Ferrari? Depends on your budget.
Writing/selling mobile games or other apps is a reasonable way to get started. Even if your app doesn't sell it gives you some experience; and you'll have more credibility if you can point to a few things in the store of your choice that have your name on them. You'll also get a better idea of how many hours are involved in a project to help with the bidding.
All that said, if all you want to do is write code you will have to compete with third world developers. Given your background in writing you might look for someone who wants reviews, tech docs, etc. Having some of your own apps on the market will give you credibility, and being a native speaker of English gives you an advantage over someone overseas.
The problem isn't with the USPTO. Their job is to do a fairly superficial review of the application and approve it if it seems legit. The long and expensive battle happens if someone challenges the patent and the inventor fights the challenge; you can't have that kind of battle over every application or nothing would ever move through the system.
The problem is when the inventor uses litigation as a club to force licensing on those who "infringe". Once they collect a royalty they can keep it, and use it to fund more litigation. If patent trolls had to return those royalties and reimburse legal fees when a patent is invalidated this whole industry would go away.
Of course that would cause the pendulum to swing in the other direction; well funded companies could infringe on a valid patent and dare you to sue; but if the patent is a good one and the infringing party has to reimburse the legal fees of the inventor defending it, market forces will make things work out. There won't be an incentive to file for questionable patents, only the really good inventions will be worth the trouble. And venture capitalists will be willing to back inventors with legitimate IP.
No, because in order to get through it the water has to evaporate. And if you're going to evaporate the water then just distill it, you don't need this stuff to desalinate water. Conventional distillation works fine.
graphene-based membranes are impermeable to all gases and liquids (vacuum-tight). However, water evaporates through them as quickly as if the membranes were not there at all.
Thanks for clarifying that. Anyway, this is a very amazing material.
Most likely it was a group of people who were ordered to disperse and were then arrested when they refused. A press badge doesn't give her a pass to ignore police orders.
If all countries played fair in this I expect the prices in the US would go down by about 10% and the prices in countries like Canada would go up about 900%.
Would this thing be able to run a JVM? With 128 cores on a 16GB chip it might actually make Eclipse fairly responsive.
I could see it as part of a database machine too. Somewhat limited by the amount of memory available on each chip, but an architecture similar to a Netezza appliance where the processing is pushed out closer to the data might be interesting.
How is this any different than a thousand donors to, say, Obama's last campaign saying...
There's a big difference between a donor saying they won't give again and a senator admitting that he's bought and paid for. Yea, I know that Dodd was just pointing out how he expects the donors would respond if they don't get the support they want; but what he *didn't* say was something like "I've looked at both sides of the issue and decided to vote this way even if it means I'll probably not get donations from them again".
There's nothing wrong with contributing money to a politician who generally supports what you want him or her to support. You want to donate some money to the Republican or the Democrat, fine. But admitting that on a specific issue his support goes to the highest bidder is admitting to bribery.
Most likely the builder doesn't really want to build a data center. Builders use all kinds of tactics like this to try and force the zoning board into granting them approval to build higher density developments than the board wants. This looks like "we'll build one big honking building that you have to approve because of a loophole we found, and a bunch of smaller houses that you denied earlier because the lots were too small".
I saw a similar move a few years ago where the builder tried to force approval of a mobile home park with a "corrective amendment" in a township that required a 2 acre minimum lot size because he really wanted to put up tract homes and a small sewage treatment plant that nobody trusted would be operated correctly. That attempt failed because the township didn't exclude mobile homes (there were actually a fair number of mobile homes in the largely rural township where the 2 acre minimum was needed for proper on-site septic systems). But it was a long and expensive fight.
Earlier measurements were by "proxy" (indirect) and tend to show the average over many years. For the past 130 years we've been measuring it directly. To me that means two things: 1) much more accurate measurement and 2) much finer granularity. In other words, there could have been relatively fast swings such as we've seen in the past 30 years, but those were lost in the noise. Now we see the rapid fluctuations we have to decide how to make sense of them. Is the climate really warming that rapidly? What's causing it? Will temperature drop just a quickly over the next 50 years? I believe the answer to all three of those questions is either Yes, No, or Maybe.
From the linked article questioning whether the research should be done
The seven experiments of concern are those that would:
1. demonstrate how to make a vaccine ineffective
2. confer resistance to antibiotics or antiviral agents
3. enhance a pathogen's virulence or make a non-virulent microbe virulent
4. increase transmissibility of a pathogen
5. alter the host range of a pathogen
6. enable a pathogen's ability to evade diagnostic or detection modalities
7. enable the weaponization of a biological agent or toxin
.
I see your point, especially related to #7. However, I'd prefer to know that we understand pathogens, antibiotic actions, and immunization before we really, really need that knowledge. Bubonic Plague wiped out about 1/3 of Europe's population because they didn't have antibiotics.
If they want to make these "corporate unions" public they're welcome to have them,
Sure about that? I doubt corporations are allowed to collude like this, even if they make it public. Unions on the other hand are encouraged to do so.
Kind of like price fixing; corporations can't get together and decide how much to charge for their products, but workers are allowed to form unions and decide how much to charge for their product (labor).
FTA: "he used the GWA Code in connection with a private business he ran training individuals in computer programming"
Training individuals who are interested in the Fed's software? Now who (cough) would be interested in that?
A couple of years ago some coal miners were trapped underground in Pennsylvania. They brought in someone with super expensive GPS equipment to locate where to drill the rescue hole. As I recall he claimed he could fix the position within a few centimeters. Anyway, they drilled where he said and hit the chamber where the men were located, so he was either very good or very lucky. But don't expect your phone or other (non-special-government licensed) consumer device to be much better than a few meters.
I don't think the United States denies climate change (whatever that means). However, there are a lot of people who don't support the idea that climate change should be used as an excuse to tax wealthy countries and transfer the money to developing countries. It should be obvious that the one change which would be the most cost effective and have highest probability of successful outcome is population control. Reduce the world's population by about 50% over the next hundred years and many, many other problems (energy, food, pollution, fresh water, etc) just go away.
One of my favorite stories, I think from Farley Mowat, is about a group of sociologists who were studying people in remote fishing villages accessible only by small boat along the coast of Newfoundland. One elderly woman they talked to had never in her life been away from the town where she was born. She'd never heard of New York City; they tried to describe it to her - millions of people living in buildings hundreds of feet tall. In response she shook her head and thought out loud "I can't imagine why so many people would want to live so far away from everything".
I fail to see the reason why I would want to live there.
If it gives you a warm fuzzy to use open source, budget what it will take to retrain or replace your programmers and build from scratch what you could get by paying the license fees. Factor in the additional risk and schedule impact of build versus buy. Then when you're done, contribute everything you paid your team to develop back as Open Source code so anyone else who wants to do the same thing can use it.
Most folks probably don't know how to secure them properly.
Ask most people who are having health problems how they're doing and they'll talk your ear off. A patient leaking their own information is not a HIPAA violation.
The usual reasons given for caregivers keeping medical records private, e.g. you don't want prospective employers to know about a chronic condition, don't apply to individuals taking their own records home.
Pointing to the Arab Spring as "pretty great" kind of overlooks the fact that it wouldn't have been possible if the dictators thought they could slaughter any who opposed them. How many hundred thousand Kurds and Iraqis were killed by Saddam? Nobody know for sure. You think Mubarak or Qaddaffi couldn't have crushed those uprisings with force fifteen years ago?
Slashdot Mirror
media tried to downplay Occupy Wall Street as just a money issue?
Downplay? The whole thing has been a media event from the beginning.
real Net war in progress is over how much Hollywood is going to get paid to go away
And what would replace it? Your proposal assumes tech companies would produce content for what reason? Generosity to you? Do you really think Microsoft will produce movies you want to watch? Or that you'll find them on SourceForge?
There's plenty they could do differently today. Stealth technology, carbon fiber, etc. But all of that is expensive. Do you put new tires on the old Ford and drive it to work for another year, or buy a new Ferrari? Depends on your budget.
All that said, if all you want to do is write code you will have to compete with third world developers. Given your background in writing you might look for someone who wants reviews, tech docs, etc. Having some of your own apps on the market will give you credibility, and being a native speaker of English gives you an advantage over someone overseas.
Sadly, probably not. The ones behind this likely cashed in their stock options and left long ago.
The problem is when the inventor uses litigation as a club to force licensing on those who "infringe". Once they collect a royalty they can keep it, and use it to fund more litigation. If patent trolls had to return those royalties and reimburse legal fees when a patent is invalidated this whole industry would go away.
Of course that would cause the pendulum to swing in the other direction; well funded companies could infringe on a valid patent and dare you to sue; but if the patent is a good one and the infringing party has to reimburse the legal fees of the inventor defending it, market forces will make things work out. There won't be an incentive to file for questionable patents, only the really good inventions will be worth the trouble. And venture capitalists will be willing to back inventors with legitimate IP.
No, because in order to get through it the water has to evaporate. And if you're going to evaporate the water then just distill it, you don't need this stuff to desalinate water. Conventional distillation works fine.
graphene-based membranes are impermeable to all gases and liquids (vacuum-tight). However, water evaporates through them as quickly as if the membranes were not there at all.
Thanks for clarifying that. Anyway, this is a very amazing material.
Most likely it was a group of people who were ordered to disperse and were then arrested when they refused. A press badge doesn't give her a pass to ignore police orders.
If all countries played fair in this I expect the prices in the US would go down by about 10% and the prices in countries like Canada would go up about 900%.
He was a drummer, until he took an arrow to the knee
I could see it as part of a database machine too. Somewhat limited by the amount of memory available on each chip, but an architecture similar to a Netezza appliance where the processing is pushed out closer to the data might be interesting.
How is this any different than a thousand donors to, say, Obama's last campaign saying...
There's a big difference between a donor saying they won't give again and a senator admitting that he's bought and paid for. Yea, I know that Dodd was just pointing out how he expects the donors would respond if they don't get the support they want; but what he *didn't* say was something like "I've looked at both sides of the issue and decided to vote this way even if it means I'll probably not get donations from them again".
There's nothing wrong with contributing money to a politician who generally supports what you want him or her to support. You want to donate some money to the Republican or the Democrat, fine. But admitting that on a specific issue his support goes to the highest bidder is admitting to bribery.
I saw a similar move a few years ago where the builder tried to force approval of a mobile home park with a "corrective amendment" in a township that required a 2 acre minimum lot size because he really wanted to put up tract homes and a small sewage treatment plant that nobody trusted would be operated correctly. That attempt failed because the township didn't exclude mobile homes (there were actually a fair number of mobile homes in the largely rural township where the 2 acre minimum was needed for proper on-site septic systems). But it was a long and expensive fight.
Earlier measurements were by "proxy" (indirect) and tend to show the average over many years. For the past 130 years we've been measuring it directly. To me that means two things: 1) much more accurate measurement and 2) much finer granularity. In other words, there could have been relatively fast swings such as we've seen in the past 30 years, but those were lost in the noise. Now we see the rapid fluctuations we have to decide how to make sense of them. Is the climate really warming that rapidly? What's causing it? Will temperature drop just a quickly over the next 50 years? I believe the answer to all three of those questions is either Yes, No, or Maybe.
The seven experiments of concern are those that would:
1. demonstrate how to make a vaccine ineffective
2. confer resistance to antibiotics or antiviral agents
3. enhance a pathogen's virulence or make a non-virulent microbe virulent
4. increase transmissibility of a pathogen
5. alter the host range of a pathogen
6. enable a pathogen's ability to evade diagnostic or detection modalities
7. enable the weaponization of a biological agent or toxin
.
I see your point, especially related to #7. However, I'd prefer to know that we understand pathogens, antibiotic actions, and immunization before we really, really need that knowledge. Bubonic Plague wiped out about 1/3 of Europe's population because they didn't have antibiotics.
If they want to make these "corporate unions" public they're welcome to have them,
Sure about that? I doubt corporations are allowed to collude like this, even if they make it public. Unions on the other hand are encouraged to do so.
Kind of like price fixing; corporations can't get together and decide how much to charge for their products, but workers are allowed to form unions and decide how much to charge for their product (labor).
FTA: "he used the GWA Code in connection with a private business he ran training individuals in computer programming" Training individuals who are interested in the Fed's software? Now who (cough) would be interested in that?
A couple of years ago some coal miners were trapped underground in Pennsylvania. They brought in someone with super expensive GPS equipment to locate where to drill the rescue hole. As I recall he claimed he could fix the position within a few centimeters. Anyway, they drilled where he said and hit the chamber where the men were located, so he was either very good or very lucky. But don't expect your phone or other (non-special-government licensed) consumer device to be much better than a few meters.
Not to be pedantic, but "devil dogs" is a nickname for the United States Marines.
I don't think the United States denies climate change (whatever that means). However, there are a lot of people who don't support the idea that climate change should be used as an excuse to tax wealthy countries and transfer the money to developing countries. It should be obvious that the one change which would be the most cost effective and have highest probability of successful outcome is population control. Reduce the world's population by about 50% over the next hundred years and many, many other problems (energy, food, pollution, fresh water, etc) just go away.
I fail to see the reason why I would want to live there.
You and than old woman are the same...
If it gives you a warm fuzzy to use open source, budget what it will take to retrain or replace your programmers and build from scratch what you could get by paying the license fees. Factor in the additional risk and schedule impact of build versus buy. Then when you're done, contribute everything you paid your team to develop back as Open Source code so anyone else who wants to do the same thing can use it.
Most folks probably don't know how to secure them properly.
Ask most people who are having health problems how they're doing and they'll talk your ear off. A patient leaking their own information is not a HIPAA violation. The usual reasons given for caregivers keeping medical records private, e.g. you don't want prospective employers to know about a chronic condition, don't apply to individuals taking their own records home.
Pointing to the Arab Spring as "pretty great" kind of overlooks the fact that it wouldn't have been possible if the dictators thought they could slaughter any who opposed them. How many hundred thousand Kurds and Iraqis were killed by Saddam? Nobody know for sure. You think Mubarak or Qaddaffi couldn't have crushed those uprisings with force fifteen years ago?