If somebody just sends the Patent Office this Slashdot article, then they would be obligated to withdraw the patent;
Someone from the Patent Office would actually read the claims rather than relying on theodp's fabrications and misrepresentations and would conclude that the patent has merit.
How is it that Amazon still keeps on getting away with these illegal patents?
Illegal? Are you theodp posting as an Anonymous Coward now?
Here are the relevant parts from all of the links in the summary:
Wikipedia time-sharing article: "Users were charged rent for the terminal, a charge for hours of connect time, a charge for seconds of CPU time, and a charge for kilobyte-months of disk storage." Yeah, ok... that's metered service, just like your power bill or long distance charges.
Plato history article: Uh, this mentions getting a 50th anniversary Plato-style Google logo on Google. Nothing relevant on this link.
The actual patent abstract: "A method and system for dynamic pricing of web services utilization. According to one embodiment, a method may include dynamically predicting utilization of a web services computing resource that is expected to occur during a given interval of time, and dependent upon the dynamically predicted utilization, setting a price associated with utilization of the web services computing resource occurring during the given interval of time. The method may further include providing the price to a customer. "
Does charging for CPU time and resources involve dynamic prediction? No? I didn't think so. Lousy try, theodp. Better luck next time.
No, increase the budget instead: give perks to employees that deny patents like this.
Sorry, but someones already patented that...
Can we patent this type of reply on Slashdot so that we don't get the inevitable trite "that's been patented" responses? I mean heck... at try and be clever and original if you're going to pull out that crusty relic of a response.
I don't really understand why they needed to put the cat under to place the new legs onto the rods, then the cat walked and even jumped onto a pack of toilet paper.
Same reason you put a cat under to clean its teeth. Messing around with a cat's legs while it's awake is likely to cost you a few fingers.
But I was just wondering if he accepted his new paws, or tried to bite them off? I mean, even some humans have some problems with new limbs, and they can understand what is going on.
It would be interesting to find that out. However, I suspect the answer would be something along the lines of "What the...?!? Okay, this is pretty freaking weird. But it's better than dragging my stumps around."
What exactly is newsworthy about "the first woman to..."?
It shouldn't be newsworthy, just as "the first black president" ought not to get any coverage. However, it's often because of biases (whether intentional or not) that the particular newsworthy event is discussed. At a deep, fundamental level, people want to discuss the change and whether or not it is important.
Of course, there are sometimes novel things that happen which are completely unimportant and morons will go to great lengths to make a big deal out of nothing. I believe this explains the popularity of "First Post" comments on Slashdot.
So who does have the authority to make a decision like this in a time of crisis? Or is this just one of those things that would take a year or 2 to pass and would never actually get anywhere.
My understanding is that the decision was made, and the moratorium put in place. Then it was challenged and went before the courts. Seems like the process works as it ought to.
Besides, how exactly is it this judge's job to weigh the harm and benefit of a presidential order?
Simply put, the plaintiffs have argued that the government does not have the authority to impose such a ban. The judge considered the argument, researched the applicable law, and agreed. This would be no different than the government trying to suppress freedom of speech -- if the government does not have the authority to enact a law, it's up to the judicial system to strike it down.
Why do you assume nighttime staff would just sit idle when there isn't a fire to put out? Surely there's enough stuff to do where it doesn't matter when it's done. A company as supposedly innovative as Google should be able to think of something that can be as easily taken care of at night for those people to do when there isn't an emergency.
Well, I'm basing my comment off of a lot of assumptions. I'm assuming that whoever claimed that Google constantly needs to page off-duty personnel to respond to emergencies is correct. I'm also assuming that because they need to do this, they do not have the appropriate staff (quantity and/or experience level) on hand in one or more data centers to handle the additional workload that a typical outage entails. Finally, if this is all true I am assuming that the reason for it is a simple financial one -- it doesn't make sense to give them "busy work" to occupy their time during non-emergency situations, and they don't have enough real work to have it make sense, so it's cheaper to keep paging off-duty personnel.
Of course, I could be totally wrong. Your mileage may vary, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
And what well is that? Apparently I'm missing something, and I suspect others the same thing.
Well, given that I suspect the name of the satellite sounds suspiciously close to "goatse", I don't want an image of this gravity well they speak of.
With explanations too:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/category/science-tattoo-emporium/
As if this doesn't happen every day in all industries. This is *obvious.* This belongs in a fucking contract, not a goddamn patent.
Maybe so, but claiming that it's "60's-Era Chargebacks" is a complete misrepresentation based on the so-called "articles" linked to in the summary.
Ironically, your post follows the response predicted by the meta-meme exactly.
Thanks for noticing.
If somebody just sends the Patent Office this Slashdot article, then they would be obligated to withdraw the patent;
Someone from the Patent Office would actually read the claims rather than relying on theodp's fabrications and misrepresentations and would conclude that the patent has merit.
How is it that Amazon still keeps on getting away with these illegal patents?
Illegal? Are you theodp posting as an Anonymous Coward now?
So who is more brainless?
You're brainless for not reading the patent claims, and theodp is brainless for his nonstop anti-Amazon patent tirade (372 results)
Here are the relevant parts from all of the links in the summary:
Wikipedia time-sharing article: "Users were charged rent for the terminal, a charge for hours of connect time, a charge for seconds of CPU time, and a charge for kilobyte-months of disk storage." Yeah, ok... that's metered service, just like your power bill or long distance charges.
Plato history article: Uh, this mentions getting a 50th anniversary Plato-style Google logo on Google. Nothing relevant on this link.
The actual patent abstract: "A method and system for dynamic pricing of web services utilization. According to one embodiment, a method may include dynamically predicting utilization of a web services computing resource that is expected to occur during a given interval of time, and dependent upon the dynamically predicted utilization, setting a price associated with utilization of the web services computing resource occurring during the given interval of time. The method may further include providing the price to a customer. "
Does charging for CPU time and resources involve dynamic prediction? No? I didn't think so. Lousy try, theodp. Better luck next time.
No, increase the budget instead: give perks to employees that deny patents like this.
Sorry, but someones already patented that...
Can we patent this type of reply on Slashdot so that we don't get the inevitable trite "that's been patented" responses? I mean heck... at try and be clever and original if you're going to pull out that crusty relic of a response.
I don't really understand why they needed to put the cat under to place the new legs onto the rods, then the cat walked and even jumped onto a pack of toilet paper.
Same reason you put a cat under to clean its teeth. Messing around with a cat's legs while it's awake is likely to cost you a few fingers.
But I was just wondering if he accepted his new paws, or tried to bite them off? I mean, even some humans have some problems with new limbs, and they can understand what is going on.
It would be interesting to find that out. However, I suspect the answer would be something along the lines of "What the...?!? Okay, this is pretty freaking weird. But it's better than dragging my stumps around."
Please see http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1698504&cid=32692898
Wow, I submitted that like a week ago.
Your submission was undergoing testing for the last week at room temperature and the editors are now confident enough that it will be acceptable.
So Twitter is barred for twenty years from misleading customers, after which.... ?
After which someone can register the expired domain name and get all nostalgic about how people got so worked up over such a stupid concept.
We're talking about Twitter...a 20 years barring is permanent.
No kidding, that's like 4 consecutive life sentences for Twitter.
that's why nobody wants to own porn.com...
it is so easy to filter.
I'd give you $50,000 for porn.com.
wikipornia.xxx
No... it's wankipedia.xxx
I have dibs on Vin-Diesel-Is.xXx
Nah, $2-$5 is micropayments. [...] I have no idea where you got $0.05 from.
Get off my lawn:
http://web.archive.org/web/19970601153143/http://www.millicent.digital.com/ (as low as 1/10th cent)
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20011223.html ("In addition to true micro-payments, some sites might have midi-payments ranging from 20 cents to a dollar, and perhaps even maxi-payments of several dollars.")
Sorry, but I regularly purchase $2 to $5 items on my credit card. Calling that a micropayment is ridiculous.
SPF 70+ and a hat.
That explains the Michael Jackson-esque pallor: http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201006/r589684_3766014.jpg
What exactly is newsworthy about "the first woman to..."?
It shouldn't be newsworthy, just as "the first black president" ought not to get any coverage. However, it's often because of biases (whether intentional or not) that the particular newsworthy event is discussed. At a deep, fundamental level, people want to discuss the change and whether or not it is important.
Of course, there are sometimes novel things that happen which are completely unimportant and morons will go to great lengths to make a big deal out of nothing. I believe this explains the popularity of "First Post" comments on Slashdot.
This is the reason we have the right to bare arms. My .45 will be empty before they get any samples off me.
Wouldn't you rather wear long sleeves? Having bare arms just makes it easier to take a DNA sample.
How often does anything that looks like an obfuscated C contest entry actually get committed to a repository ?
Check out any project on SourceForge that is written in Perl. :)
So who does have the authority to make a decision like this in a time of crisis? Or is this just one of those things that would take a year or 2 to pass and would never actually get anywhere.
My understanding is that the decision was made, and the moratorium put in place. Then it was challenged and went before the courts. Seems like the process works as it ought to.
Besides, how exactly is it this judge's job to weigh the harm and benefit of a presidential order?
Simply put, the plaintiffs have argued that the government does not have the authority to impose such a ban. The judge considered the argument, researched the applicable law, and agreed. This would be no different than the government trying to suppress freedom of speech -- if the government does not have the authority to enact a law, it's up to the judicial system to strike it down.
Maybe he should get a nice BP logo tatooed on his lower back, so that his corporate master has something pretty to look at while buggering justice
You're confusing "justice" with "prior restraint."
Ooh, restraints like leather straps, handcuffs, and rope?
Why do you assume nighttime staff would just sit idle when there isn't a fire to put out? Surely there's enough stuff to do where it doesn't matter when it's done. A company as supposedly innovative as Google should be able to think of something that can be as easily taken care of at night for those people to do when there isn't an emergency.
Well, I'm basing my comment off of a lot of assumptions. I'm assuming that whoever claimed that Google constantly needs to page off-duty personnel to respond to emergencies is correct. I'm also assuming that because they need to do this, they do not have the appropriate staff (quantity and/or experience level) on hand in one or more data centers to handle the additional workload that a typical outage entails. Finally, if this is all true I am assuming that the reason for it is a simple financial one -- it doesn't make sense to give them "busy work" to occupy their time during non-emergency situations, and they don't have enough real work to have it make sense, so it's cheaper to keep paging off-duty personnel.
Of course, I could be totally wrong. Your mileage may vary, etc.